RESTRICTED  
  
WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
23 June 2015  
(15-3271)  Page: 1/447  
Working Party on the Accession of  
the Republic of Kazakhstan    
  
  REPORT OF THE WORKING PARTY ON THE  
ACCESSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN  
  
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 2 - 
 
  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 7  
DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED ........................................................................................... 7  
INTRODUCTORY ST ATEMENTS ......................................................................................... 7  
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES .............................................................................................. 8  
-  Monetary and Fi scal Policy ...................................................................................... 8  
-  Foreign Exchange and Payments ........................................................................... 12  
-  Investment Regime ............................................................................................... 18  
-  State Ownership, State-Trading Entities and Privatization .................................... 24  
(a) Privatization .......................................................................................................... 24  
(b) State-owned and State-controlled Enterprises, Enterprises with Special 
and Exclusive Privileges ........................................................................................ 26  
-  Pricing Poli cies ...................................................................................................... 36  
-  Competition Policy ................................................................................................ 42  
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING PO LICIES ........................................ 48  
-  Powers of Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of Government ................ 48  
-  Framework of the Eurasian Economic Union among the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation  and the Republic of Belarus .......................... 51  
(a) Legal Framework Establishing th e Eurasian Econ omic Union ................................ 51  
(b) Eurasian Economic Union Structure an d Competency in the Area of Trade ............ 51  
(c) The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council .............................................................. 51  
(d) The Eurasian Intergov ernmental Council .............................................................. 52  
(e) The Eurasian Economic Commission ...................................................................... 52  
(f) The Council of the Commission .............................................................................. 53  
(g) The Collegium of the Commissi on ......................................................................... 53  
(h) Decision-making within the Bodies of th e EAEU  .................................................... 55  
(i) The Court of the Eurasi an Economic Union ............................................................ 56  
(j) Transparen cy ........................................................................................................ 58  
(k) Implementation of WTO Commitmen ts under the EAEU Regime ........................... 58  
-  Government Entities Responsible for Making and Implementing Policies 
Affecting Foreign Trade; Right of Appeal ............................................................... 59  
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS ............................................................... 61  
-  Registration Requirements for Im port and Export Operations .............................. 61  
-  (a) Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Prod ucts ................................................................... 65  
-  (b) Pharmace uticals .............................................................................................. 66  
-  (c) Products containing cryptographi c capabilities, including goods with 
encryption technology and sp ecial technical devices............................................. 66  
-  (d) Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 67  
A. IMPORT REGU LATIONS ......................................................................................... 68  
-  Ordinary Customs Duties ....................................................................................... 68  
-  Other Duties an d Charges ..................................................................................... 72  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 3 - 
 
  -  Tariff Exemptions .................................................................................................. 73  
-  Tariff Rate Quotas ................................................................................................. 76  
-  Fees and Charges for Services Rendered ............................................................... 80  
-  Application of Internal Taxes to Imports ............................................................... 81  
-  Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions, Quotas and 
Licensing Sy stems ................................................................................................. 87  
-  (a) Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas .............. 88  
-  (b) Import Li censing ............................................................................................. 90  
-  Customs Valu ation ................................................................................................ 99  
-  Rules of Or igin .................................................................................................... 106  
-  Other Customs Fo rmalities .................................................................................. 109  
-  Preshipment In spection ...................................................................................... 111  
-  Anti-dumping, Countervailing Duty  and Safeguar d Regimes ............................... 112  
-  (a) Transitional  regime ....................................................................................... 112  
-  (b) Regime established und er the EAEU Treaty ................................................... 113  
B. EXPORT REGU LATIONS ....................................................................................... 119  
-  Customs Tariffs, Fees and Charges for Services Rendered, Application of 
Internal Taxes to Exports .................................................................................... 119  
-  Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas ................... 122  
-  Export Licensing Procedur es ............................................................................... 124  
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECTING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS ............................. 126  
-  Industrial Policy, including Subsidies .................................................................. 126  
-  Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification ..................................... 132  
(a) Legal Frame work................................................................................................. 132  
(b) Institutio ns ......................................................................................................... 138  
(c) Technical Regulations, International and National Standards, and 
Conformity Assessmen t Procedur es .................................................................... 139  
-  (i) Technical Re gulations .................................................................................... 139  
-  (ii)Technical Requirements Not Su bject to Law No. 603-II "On Technical 
Regulation" of 9 No vember 20 04 ........................................................................ 143  
-  (iii) Voluntary National and International Standard s .......................................... 144  
-  (iv) Disposition of Mandatory Nati onal Standards of  Kazakhstan ........................ 144  
-  (v) Conformity Assessment Procedures  including the Accreditation of 
Conformity Assessm ent Bodi es ........................................................................... 145  
(d) Transparen cy ...................................................................................................... 153  
-  Sanitary and Phytosani tary Measures ................................................................. 155  
(a) Legislative Fra mework ........................................................................................ 155  
(b) Competent Authorities for the Regulation of Trade in Agricultural Products ....... 158  
-  (i) EAEU Authorities an d Responsib ilities ............................................................ 158  
-  (ii) National Authorities ...................................................................................... 159  
(c) Development of Technical Regulation s/Mandatory Requirements on SPS ........... 160  
(d) Trade in Goods Subject to Veterinary Control ...................................................... 166  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 4 - 
 
  -  (i) Veterinary Ce rtificates ................................................................................... 167  
-  (ii) Establishment Approval , Register and Inspections ........................................ 171  
-  (iii) Import Permits ............................................................................................. 184  
-  (iv) Transit Permits ............................................................................................. 187  
(e) Trade in Goods Subject to Phytosanitary Control ................................................ 189  
(f) Protection of Human Hea lth ................................................................................ 193  
(g) Compliance of the SPS Regime with Specific Provisions of the  
WTO SPS Agre ement ........................................................................................... 196  
-  (i) Harmonization with Internat ional Standards and Norm s ............................... 196  
-  (ii) Risk As sessment ........................................................................................... 198  
-  (iii) Regionalization ............................................................................................. 201  
-  (iv) Equivalence .................................................................................................. 201  
-  (v) Non-discri mination ........................................................................................ 202  
(h) Transparency, Notification and Enquiry Point Ob ligations ................................... 203  
(i) Proportionality, Necessity , and Reasonab leness ................................................. 206  
(j) Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 206  
-  Trade-Related Investment Measures ................................................................... 207  
-  TRIMs in the Oil and Gas and Mining Sector s ...................................................... 207  
-  TRIMs in the Automo tive Sect or .......................................................................... 210  
-  Free Zones, Special Economic Areas .................................................................... 212  
-  (a) EAEU Regulati on of SEZs ............................................................................... 213  
-  (b) Basic Law on SEZs ......................................................................................... 215  
-  (c) Customs and Tax Legislation of  the Republic of Kazakhstan .......................... 216  
-  (d) Free Warehouse Cu stoms Regime ................................................................. 218  
-  Government Pr ocurement ................................................................................... 220  
-  Transit ................................................................................................................. 224  
-  Government-mandated Counter -trade and Barter ............................................... 226  
-  Agricultural Policies ............................................................................................ 226  
(a) Import s ............................................................................................................... 226  
(b) Exports ................................................................................................................ 227  
(c) Internal po licies .................................................................................................. 227  
-  Trade in Civil Aircraft .......................................................................................... 230  
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME ........................................... 232  
-  GENERAL ............................................................................................................. 232  
-  Industrial Property  Protection ............................................................................ 232  
-  Responsible Agencies for Policy Fo rmulation and Implementation ..................... 233  
-  Participation in International In tellectual Property Agreements ......................... 234  
-  Application of National and MFN Treatment to Foreign Nationals ........................ 235  
-  Fees and Taxes .................................................................................................... 235  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 5 - 
 
  -  SUBSTANTIVE STANDARDS OF PROTECTION, INCLUDING PROCEDURES 
FOR THE ACQUISITION AND MAINTENA NCE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 
RIGHTS ............................................................................................................... 236  
-  Copyright and Rela ted Rights .............................................................................. 236  
-  Trademarks, includin g Service Marks .................................................................. 238  
-  Geographical Indications, includ ing Appellations of Origin ................................. 239  
-  Industrial Design s ............................................................................................... 242  
-  Patents ................................................................................................................ 243  
-  Plant Variety Pr otection ...................................................................................... 246  
-  Layout Designs of Inte grated Circ uits ................................................................. 246  
-  Requirements on Undisclosed Inform ation, including Trade Secrets and 
Test Data ............................................................................................................. 246  
-  ENFORCEM ENT .................................................................................................... 248  
-  Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies ............................................................... 248  
-  Provisional Me asures  .......................................................................................... 249  
-  Administrative Procedur es and Reme dies ........................................................... 250  
-  Special Border Measures ..................................................................................... 251  
-  Criminal Proc edures  ............................................................................................ 252  
VI. POLICIES AFFECTING TR ADE IN SERV ICES ......................................................... 254  
VII. TRANSPARENCY .................................................................................................. 259  
-  Publication of Information on Trade .................................................................... 259  
-  Notifications ........................................................................................................ 262  
VIII. TRADE AGREEMENTS ........................................................................................... 263  
CONCLUSI ONS ............................................................................................................. 269  
ANNEX 1 ...................................................................................................................... 270 
ANNEX 2 ...................................................................................................................... 289 
ANNEX 3( A) ................................................................................................................. 30 8 
ANNEX 3( B) ................................................................................................................. 30 9 
ANNEX 3( C) ................................................................................................................. 31 0 
ANNEX 3( D) ................................................................................................................. 31 1 
ANNEX 3(E) .................................................................................................................. 312  
ANNEX 3(F) .................................................................................................................. 313  
ANNEX 3( G) ................................................................................................................. 31 5 
ANNEX 3( H) ................................................................................................................. 31 6 
ANNEX 4 ...................................................................................................................... 317 
ANNEX 5( A) ................................................................................................................. 32 0 
ANNEX 5( B) ................................................................................................................. 32 1 
ANNEX 6 ...................................................................................................................... 323 
ANNEX 7 ...................................................................................................................... 348 
ANNEX 8 ...................................................................................................................... 361 
ANNEX 9 ...................................................................................................................... 362 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 6 - 
 
  ANNEX 10..................................................................................................................... 3 63 
ANNEX 11..................................................................................................................... 3 65 
ANNEX 12..................................................................................................................... 3 70 
ANNEX 13..................................................................................................................... 3 71 
ANNEX 14( A) ............................................................................................................... 372  
ANNEX 14( B) ............................................................................................................... 374  
ANNEX 15( A) ............................................................................................................... 376  
ANNEX 15( B) ............................................................................................................... 378  
ANNEX 15( C) ............................................................................................................... 380  
ANNEX 15( D) ............................................................................................................... 382  
ANNEX 16..................................................................................................................... 3 83 
ANNEX 17( A) ............................................................................................................... 384  
ANNEX 17( B) ............................................................................................................... 385  
ANNEX 18..................................................................................................................... 3 86 
ANNEX 19..................................................................................................................... 3 87 
ANNEX 20..................................................................................................................... 4 05 
ANNEX 21..................................................................................................................... 4 29 
ANNEX 22( A) ............................................................................................................... 430  
ANNEX 22( B) ............................................................................................................... 432  
ANNEX 22( C) ............................................................................................................... 433  
ANNEX 23..................................................................................................................... 4 34 
ANNEX 24..................................................................................................................... 4 41 
APPENDIX .................................................................................................................... 4 44 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 7 - 
 
  I. INTRODUCTION 
1. The Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as Kazakhstan) 
applied for accession (WT/ACC/KAZ/1) to the World Trade Organization (WTO) on 29 January 1996.  At its meeting on 6 February 1996, the General Council established a Working 
Party to examine the application of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan to accede to the 
WTO under Article XII of the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization (document WT/GC/M/10).  The terms of referenc e and the membership of the Working Party are 
reproduced in document WT/ACC/KAZ/2/Rev.40. 
2. The Working Party met on 19-20 March 1997 and 9 October 1997 under the Chairmanship 
of H.E. Mr. B. Ekblom (Finland); on 9 October 1998, 12-13 July 2001, and 13 December 2002 under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. P. Huhtaniemi (Finland); on 4 March 2004, 3 November 2004, 
7 June 2005, 1 November 2006, and 17 July 2008 under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. V. Himanen 
(Finland); on 18 April 2012 under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. H. Himanen (Finland);  on 24 July 2012, 5 October 2012, 10 December 2012, 20 March 2013, 6 June 2013, 23 July 2013, 
11 October 2013, 23 July 2014, and 10 and 22 June 2015 under the Chairmanship of 
H.E. Mr. V. Himanen (Finland).   
DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED 
3. The Working Party had before it, to serve as a basis for its discussions, a Memorandum on 
the Foreign Trade Regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan (WT/ACC/KAZ/3, WT/ACC/KAZ/3/Add.1), a Survey of the Foreign Trade Regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan (WT/ACC/KAZ/40), the questions submitted by Members of the Working Part y on the foreign trade regime of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan, together with the replies thereto (WT/ACC/KAZ/6, WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/10, WT/A CC/KAZ/11, WT/ACC/KAZ/14, WT/ACC/KAZ/22, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/37, WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.3, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.3/Corr.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/50,  WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Corr.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/57, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/63, WT/ACC/KAZ/66, WT/ACC/KA Z/67, WT/ACC/KAZ/70, WT/ACC/KAZ/71, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/72, WT/ACC/KAZ/75, WT/ACC/KA Z/77, WT/ACC/KAZ/78, WT/ACC/KAZ/83, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/87), and other information provided by the authorities of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
(WT/ACC/KAZ/8, WT/ACC/KAZ/12, WT/ACC/ KAZ/17, WT/ACC/KAZ/19, WT/ACC/KAZ/24, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/25, WT/ACC/KAZ/26, WT/ACC/KAZ/27/Rev.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/28, WT/ACC/KAZ/29, WT/ACC/KAZ/30, WT/ACC/KAZ/31, WT/ACC/KAZ/32/Rev.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/34/Rev.3, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/35, WT/ACC/KAZ/41, WT/ACC/KAZ/43/Rev.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/44, WT/ACC/KAZ/45, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/46, WT/ACC/KAZ/47, WT/ACC/KA Z/48, WT/ACC/KAZ/51, WT/ACC/KAZ/52, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/53, WT/ACC/KAZ/54, WT/ACC/KAZ/55, WT/ACC/KAZ/58/Rev.3, WT/ACC/KAZ/59, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/60/Rev.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/61/Rev.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/64, WT/ACC/KAZ/65, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/73/Rev.9, WT/ACC/KAZ/74 and WT/ACC/KAZ/88), including the legislative texts and other documentation listed in Annex 1.   
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENTS 
4. The representative of Kazakhstan recalled that the Republic of Kazakhstan had declared its 
independence on 16 December 1991.  Kazakhstan had since implemented a programme of structural reforms with the objective to ensure transition to a market economy and sustainable 
economic growth.  Significant progress was achieved in such important areas as trade and price 
liberalization, privatization, competition and fiscal and monetary reforms.  
5. The foundations of Kazakhstan's reform programme consisted of a legal and regulatory 
regime based upon internationally accepted stan dards and conducive to trade and investment.  
In particular, Kazakhstan liberalized its trade regi me by substantially reducing import and export 
licensing requirements to a limited number of go ods; and abolishing State-trading monopoly and 
non-tariff barriers to trade such as import and export quotas.  In the sphere of services market 
access, Kazakhstan established a legal and regulatory framework, which eliminated barriers to entry and guaranteed fair competition.  
6. Key trade and investment legislation adhered to WTO principles by applying a 
non-discriminatory regime to products and services regardless of their origin and national 
treatment towards foreign investors.  The Customs Code was based on the WTO and WCO norms, WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 8 - 
 
  thus ensuring transparency of customs procedures and timely processing of goods.  
The Government of Kazakhstan had also been under taking important steps to bring its legislation 
into conformity with WTO norms, most notably, in the spheres of technical regulation, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, protection of intellectual property rights, import licensing, etc. 
7. Kazakhstan was ready to become a member of the WTO and to fully integrate into the 
multilateral trading system.  This willingness wa s expressed when the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan submitted a formal application for WTO accession on 29 January 1996. 
8. Members of the Working Party welcomed the application of the Republic of Kazakhstan to 
join the WTO and pledged their full support for the accession process.   Members acknowledged the scope of the reforms and steps undertaken by the Government of Kazakhstan in order to establish a market-oriented economy and its strong commitment to integration to the multilateral 
trading system. They also noted that Kazakhstan played an important role in trade flows on the 
Eurasian continent and therefore its membership would strengthen the Organization and the world 
economy. 
9. The Working Party reviewed the economic policies and foreign trade regime of Kazakhstan 
and the possible terms of a draft Protocol of A ccession.  The views expressed by Members of the 
Working Party and the various aspects of Kazakhst an's foreign trade regime, and on the terms and 
conditions of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, are summarized in paragraphs 10 to 1174 
below. 
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES - Monetary and Fiscal Policy 
10. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the National Bank of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (NBRK) was the sole authority determining and implementing the State monetary and credit policy.  Kazakhstan had a two-tier banking system, in which the NBRK represented the 
upper (first) tier, while all other banks represented th e lower (second) tier.  Within the limits of its 
authority, the NBRK represented the interests of th e Republic of Kazakhstan in relations with other 
countries' central banks and other banks; international banks; and other financial and credit 
institutions.  The NBRK was not guided by the aim of gaining profit in performing its tasks.  
The NBRK was independent, within the limits of its authority granted by law.  Representative and executive bodies had no authority to interfer e in the activity of the NBRK, its branches, 
representative offices and organizations. 
11. According to Law No. 2155 "On the National Bank of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995 
(as amended on 5 July 2012), the primary goal of the monetary policy of the NBRK was to ensure 
price stability.  To accomplish this primary goal, the NBRK was assigned with the following tasks:  
(i) development and implementation of the State' s monetary policy; (ii) support of the payment 
system; (iii) foreign exchange regulation and foreign exchange control; (iv) facilitation of the financial system's stability; (v) regulation, control and supervision of the financial market and 
financial organizations; (vi) protection of rights and interests of financial services consumers; and 
(vii) statistical activity in the monetary sphere and in the external sector, as well as other tasks in accordance with the laws of Kazakhstan and the ac ts of the President.  The NBRK also performed 
the function of a lender of last resort and was entitled to carry out other transactions, authorized 
under Kazakhstan's law, in accordance with the decisions of its Board.  Since 1998, the NBRK had 
not financed the budget deficit of the State.   
12. In order to conduct its monetary policy, the NBRK provided loans to commercial banks; 
took deposits in national and foreign currencies;  undertook interventions on the foreign exchange 
market; issued short-term notes; conducted open market transactions with securities; and provided commercial bill refinancing.  The instruments used by the NBRK for the conduct of 
monetary policy included setting of the official refinancing rate and interest rates on main 
transactions, as well as establishing minimum reserve requirements.   
13. In 2011, inflation in Kazakhstan had been measured at 7.4%.  In 2012, one of the goals of 
the NBRK had been to implement monetary policy directed at the provision of price stability and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 9 - 
 
  maintenance of annual inflation at a low level, which would be adequate with existing 
macroeconomic conditions.   
14. In order to control the amount and remunerati on rates on bank deposits and loans, the 
NBRK used the normative standards for minimum rese rve requirements.  In exceptional cases, if it 
was not possible to slow down inflation by means of indirect monetary control, the NBRK had the 
authority to establish direct quantitative restrictions on particular types of transactions.  Since the introduction of the national currency in 1993, the tenge (KZT), the NBRK had not established 
maximum rates and had not established credit restrictions since 1995.   
15. The main instruments of rate control on the financial market and sterilization of banks' 
surplus liquidity were short-term banknotes and th e deposits of second tier banks in the NBRK.  
The short-term banknotes were State securities, issued by the NBRK.  The supply of short-term 
banknotes was determined on the basis of constructing a financial instruments yield curve for a 
period of up to one year.  In 2011, the liquidit y situation on the monetary market had remained 
almost the same.  The conversion period for short-term banknotes was kept at existing levels - 
three, six and nine months. 
16. In response to questions on the currency regime, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that the earlier regulatory procedure for currency transactions had been completely revoked as of 
1 January 2007.  The existing currency regulation (registration and notification) did not limit 
currency transactions and was aimed at providing statistical monitoring of currency transactions.  The simplification of requirements for currency transactions conducted by residents, including transactions with foreign assets, was a major goal for further advancement of the currency regime 
and currency control.  In order to control risks relating to currency transactions, Kazakhstan would 
be taking measures to improve the effectiveness of  prudential regulation and risk management by 
banks, pension funds and insurance companies.   
17. Asked to clarify the term "resident" for the pu rposes of the registration and notification 
regime, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, according to Article 1 of Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005, "residents" were defined as:  
(i) citizens of Kazakhstan, including those located temporarily abroad or those on State service 
abroad, but excluding those having permanent residence abroad in accordance with the legislation of the foreign State; (ii) foreigners and stateless persons holding a document entitling them to permanent residence in Kazakhstan; (iii) all juridical persons, established under Kazakhstan's 
legislation and located in Kazakhstan, as well as their branches and representative offices located 
in either Kazakhstan or abroad; and, (iv) diplomatic, trade and other official representative offices of Kazakhstan abroad.  Accordingly, "non-resid ents" were defined as all natural persons and 
juridical persons, their branches and representative offices, which were not defined as "residents".  
She noted that licensing and registration requirements applied only to residents engaged in currency transactions (and not to non-residents).   
18. Asked to provide information on the main sources of State revenue, as well as the main 
expenditures, the representative of Kazakhstan said that State budget receipts for 2011 had represented 19.9% of GDP.  Tax revenue had accounted for 74.1% of total budget revenue - with corporate income tax (19.5%), value-added tax (16% ), individual income tax (7%), and social tax 
(5.5%) representing the main tax revenue sources.  Taxes levied on international trade and 
external transactions had accounted for 20.4% of overall tax revenue.  
19. The representative of Kazakhstan further note d that the Budget Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No.95–V of 4 December 2008 (hereinaft er: Budget Code) had laid down the legislative 
basis for the transition to a result-oriented State budgetary planning.  The Budget Code was aimed at redirecting the activity of government bodies from formal disbursement of the budget funds to 
reaching results in accordance with State policy priorities.  The following budgets were approved 
and implemented in Kazakhstan:  the republican  budget, oblast budget, capital city budget, 
republican significance city budget, and regional  budget (oblast significance city budget).  
The budget inflows were from the following:  re venues, repayments of budget loans, inflows from 
the sale of State financial assets, and loans.  Budget revenues consisted of tax inflows, non-tax 
inflows, inflows from sales of main capital, and transfers inflows.  Tax inflows comprised taxes and 
other obligatory payments to the budget stipulated by the Tax and Customs Codes of Kazakhstan.  
According to the Budget Code, obligatory paymen ts included corporate income tax, excluding 
inflows from the oil industry sector; value-added tax (VAT) on locally produced goods, works and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 10 - 
 
  services, and imported goods; excise tax on imported goods; excise tax on crude oil, gas 
condensate; excise tax on locally produced good s; and other payments to the budget.  Non-tax 
inflows were obligatory irrevocable payments to the budget, which were not related to inflows from basic capital sales, fixed grants and money transf erred to the budget on a voluntary basis, except 
transfers of (i) revenue from republican property - inflow from the net profit of republican State 
enterprises; inflow from the net profit of the NBRK; dividends from State-owned stakes; income from shares in State-owned entities; income  from the lease of State-owned property; 
remuneration for external loan placements by the State on second tier accounts, as well as for 
government deposits in the NBRK; fees on credit s issued from the republican budget; revenues 
from the sale of military equipment; and other revenues from republican property; (ii) inflows from sales of goods, services and works by State institutions, financed by the republican budget; 
(iii) inflows from government purchases, financed from the republican budget; (iv) penalties, fines 
and sanctions imposed by institutions, financed from the republican budget, except for inflows 
from the oil industry sector; and, (v) other non-ta x inflows, except inflows from the oil industry 
sector. 
20. Asked to provide information on Kazakhstan's tax system, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that the tax system was based on th e principles of justice, transparency of the tax 
legislation, and unity of the tax system.  She added that the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 (hereinafter: Tax Code), which had become effective on 1 January 2009, was aimed at (i) reducing the tax burden on economic sectors other than those related to the 
extraction of natural resources; (ii) reducing administrative barriers; and (iii) increasing the 
effectiveness of tax administration.  
21. The tax administration was made up of the State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of 
Finance and the tax service authorities.  The tax service authorities included the state revenue 
committees of oblasts and the cities of Astana and Almaty, and the state revenue committees of 
rayons, cities and districts of cities.  Tax authorities could also be established on the territories of 
special economic zones.  The tax service authorities were subject to a vertical authority, i.e., each 
tax service authority was directly subordinate to an authorized higher-level tax service authority and was not classified as a local executive government authority.  The Ministry of Finance administered the tax service authorities.  The customs authorities collected taxes paid by the 
transportation of goods across the customs border of the Eurasian Economic Union (hereafter: 
EAEU), in accordance with Kazakhstan's Tax Code, as well as the customs legislation of the EAEU and Kazakhstan. 
22. The Tax Code provided for a number of tax reductions.  The corporate income tax rate had 
been reduced from 30% to 20%.  Since 1 January 2009, VAT had been decreased from 13% to 12%.  As a result, Kazakhstan had one of the lowest VAT rates in the world.  The following 
persons were required to register for VAT payment in Kazakhstan:  (i) individual entrepreneurs; 
(ii) juridical persons of Kazakhstan, except for government institutions; and (iii) non-residents conducting business in Kazakhstan through branches or representative offices.  In accordance with the Tax Code, the mandatory registration for VAT payment did not apply to:  (i) state institutions; 
(ii) structural divisions (branches, representati ve offices) of juridical persons of Kazakhstan; 
(iii) entities subject to gambling tax, fixed tax and single land tax; and, (iv) individual entrepreneurs, juridical persons of Kazakhstan  and non-residents conducting business through 
branches or representative offices in Kazakhstan, with an annual turnover of less than 
30,000 Monthly Calculation Index (MCI)
1; i.e., small businesses.  In 2014, 30,000 MCI was 
equivalent to US$305,274 (1 MCI equaled KZT 1,852 in 2014 or approximately US$10.2). 
23. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the National Fund of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was established by Decree of the President No. 402 of 23 August 2000 with the objective to ensure stable socio-economic development of the State through reduction of dependence of the national economy on the oil se ctor and adverse impacts of external factors.  
According to Article 21 of the Budget Code, the National Fund fulfilled both saving and stabilization 
functions.  The National Fund represented assets of the State in the form of financial assets, and 
                                               
1 Monthly Calculation Index (MCI) is  an index used in Kazakhstan fo r the purpose of calculation of 
pensions and other social allowances as  well as for the application of penalties, calculation of taxes and other 
payments to the budget, annually appr oved by Law "On Republican Budget". WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 11 - 
 
  other property, except intangible assets2, accumulated on the Government's account at the NBRK.  
According to Article 22 of the Budget Code, rece ipts into the National Fund consisted of the 
following: 
- direct taxes, collected from organizations of the oil sector (except taxes collected by local 
budgets); corporate income tax; excess profit tax; mineral extraction tax; export rent tax; 
bonuses; Kazakhstan's share received under production sharing agreements; and additional payment of subsurface users, op erating activity under production sharing 
agreements;   
- other receipts from operations, conducted by companies of the oil sector (except payments 
collected by local budgets), including payments received as a result of breaching the terms of oil contracts; 
- receipts from privatization of State property  in republican ownership engaged in mining 
and processing sectors; and 
- receipts from selling land plots for agricultural purposes. 
24. She further clarified that according to Article 23 of the Budget Code, the National Fund of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan could be used:  
(i) in the form of the guaranteed transfer from the National Fund into the republican 
budget; and 
(ii) for covering of expenses related to the management by the National Fund and 
conducting annual audit. 
Investment revenues from the management by the National Fund proceeded from investments of 
the financial assets of the National Fund into financial instruments, except for intangible assets.   
25. Within the framework of social tax reforms, the Tax Code provided for the replacement of 
the existing regressive social tax scale - based on rates ranging from 13% to 5% - by a horizontal 
tax set at 11%.  The social tax was a contribution by employers, levied on the basis of the income 
of employees, and was aimed at covering fo r the social needs of the population.   
26. The Tax Code provided the following preferences for companies operating in special 
economic zones:  a 100% reduction of corpor ate income tax; a 100% reduction for advance 
p a y m e n t s  o n  c o r p o r a t e  i n c o m e  t a x ;  0 %  r a t e  f o r  t h e  l a n d  t a x ,  a s  w e l l  a s  a  z e r o  c o e f f i c i e n t  applicable to related rates in the calculation of the land tax; and 0% rate on the average value of property subject to taxation in the calculation of property tax.   
27. Prior to 1 January 2009, Kazakhstan had used two tax regime models for subsurface 
users:  (i) subsurface use contract; and, (ii) a production sharing agreement (PSA).  Since 1 January 2009, under the Tax Code, the practice of concluding PSAs with subsurface users 
had been discontinued.  This was due to the diffic ulties of controlling the correct calculation of 
reimbursable costs under the PSA.  At the same time, the tax regime defined in the PSAs, as approved by the President and signed before the enactment of the Tax Code (i.e., until 
1 January 2009), had been preserved. 
28. In accordance with the Tax Code, subsurface users paid all taxes and compulsory charges 
to the budget, in accordance with that Code, including (i) special charges for subsurface users, including a signature bonus, commercial discovery  bonus, and payment for compensation of past 
costs; (ii) a mineral extraction tax (MET); and (iii) excess profit tax. 
29. In order to improve the taxation regime for subsurface users, royalty payments had been 
replaced by a MET.  The main goal was an even distribution of the tax burden, since the royalty 
was calculated under the terms of each subsurface use contract. 
                                               
2 Intangible assets included goodwill, trade-marks,  title and publishing rights, computer software, 
licenses and franchises, copyright, patents and other ri ghts on industrial property, rights on services and 
exploitation, formulae, models, sketches and samples.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 12 - 
 
  30. In accordance with Article 331 of the Tax Code, the MET was imposed on subsurface users 
carrying out the extraction of oil, minerals, gro und water and mud, including the extraction of 
minerals from man-made mineral formations within each individual subsurface use contract.   
31. A tax reduction approach was applied in the calculation of excess profit tax by increasing 
the volume of non-taxable net income from 20% to 25%.  In accordance with the provisions of the 
Tax Code, the tax base for this tax was the part of the subsurface user's net income in excess of 25% of the sum of the user's costs in the releva nt tax period.  In addition, in calculating the 
excess profit tax, subsurface users had the right to deduct actual expenses for the acquisition of 
fixed assets and geological exploration.   
32. The rent tax on exported crude oil and gas condensate was applied at rates ranging from 
0% to 32%.  The value of factually exported crud e oil and gas condensate was subject to taxation 
in accordance with world prices. 
33. A Member requested that Kazakhstan provide information on regional initiatives in the 
area of monetary and fiscal policy.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Section XIV 
"Monetary Policy" and Annex No. 15 "Protocol on Me asures Aimed at Coordinated Monetary Policy" 
of the Eurasian Economic Union Treaty of 29 May 2014 (hereinafter: the EAEU Treaty), which 
came into effect on 1 January 2015, set up the legal framework in the EAEU in the area of 
monetary policies.  From 1 January 2015, as stipul ated in Article 64 of Section XIV of the EAEU 
Treaty, for the purposes of deepening economic integration, development of cooperation in the 
monetary and financial sphere, ensuring free movement of goods, services and capital in the territories of the member States, enhancing the role of national currencies of the member States 
in foreign trade and investment transactions, as we ll as providing mutual convertibility of these 
currencies, the member States developed and carr ied out  coordinated monetary policy within the 
EAEU.  Further, Article 64 provided that the coordi nation of exchange rate policy was conducted by 
a body which consisted of the Heads of Central Banks of the member States.  The operational 
procedures of this body would be determined in the future by a separate international agreement 
within the EAEU.  She further clarified that a decision-making authority in the area of monetary 
and fiscal policy remained in the national  competence of the member States.   
- Foreign Exchange and Payments 34. The representative of Kazakhstan said that currency transactions were regulated by the 
following normative legal acts:  Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 
13 June 2005, as amended on 6 January 2012 (her einafter: Law No. 57-III), Resolution of the 
National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan (NBRK) Board No. 154 "On Approval of Rules for 
Conducting Currency Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 28 April 2012 (hereinafter: 
Currency Rules No. 154), Resolution of the NBRK Board No. 106 "On Approval of Rules for 
Conducting Foreign Exchange Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 27 October 2006, as amended on 30 November 2009 (hereinafter: Resolu tion No. 106), Resolution of the NBRK Board 
No. 63 "On Minimum Charter Capital of Juridical Persons Solely Involved in Foreign Exchange 
Transactions" of 16 July 2009, amended on 1 February 2010 (hereinafter: Resolution No. 63), Resolution of the NBRK Board No. 42 "On Approval  of Rules on the Export-Import Currency Control 
in the Republic of Kazakhstan and Receipt by Residents of the Record Number on the Export-
Import Contracts" of 24 February 2012, as well as other normative legal acts of the NBRK. 
35. The purpose of currency regulation in Kazakhstan was to advance the national policy of 
achieving sustainable economic growth and ma intaining economic security.  The currency 
regulation goals were to:  (i) establish procedures for the circulation of currency valuables in 
Kazakhstan; (ii) create conditions for Kazakhstan's further integration into the global economy; and, (iii) provide a database on currency transactions and capital flows.  
- Role of the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
36. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the NBRK adopted normative legal acts to 
ensure the efficient and reliable transaction of the payment systems in Kazakhstan and was 
responsible for their oversight.  In accordance with Article 48 of Law No. 2155 "On the National 
Bank of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995, the NBRK had to arrange, coordinate and regulate payments and money transmissions.  The NBRK had to establish (i) "rules and peculiarities of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 13 - 
 
  application" of payment methods and/or money transmissions; and (ii) rules and conditions for 
payments related to the use of money in cash.   
37. The NBRK activities in the sphere of currency regulation and currency control extended to, 
inter alia :  (i) determination of the order of currency valuables in circulation in Kazakhstan; 
(ii) establishment of rules for conducting currency transactions by residents and non-residents in 
Kazakhstan; (iii) establishment of unified rules and conditions for registration of foreign trade contracts for export and import, and of procedures for export-import currency control for fulfilling 
repatriation requirements by residents; (iv) esta blishment of the procedure for import, export and 
transmission of currency valuables in and out of Kazakhstan; (v) establishment of licensing 
procedures and the issuance of licenses for foreign exchange transactions; (vi) establishment of registration procedures and the issuance of registration certificates for foreign exchange offices; 
(vii) establishment of qualification requirements for conducting foreign exchange transactions; 
(viii) establishment of procedures for registration and notification of currency transactions and opening accounts in foreign banks by residents of Kazakhstan, as well as the issuance of 
registration and notification certificates; (ix) determination of the "rate deviation of foreign 
currency in purchase from the rate of foreign curre ncy in sale for tenge" in transactions conducted 
through exchange offices; (x) issuance of special permits for currency transactions within the 
special currency regime; (xi) establishment of procedures and forms of reporting on currency 
transactions obligatory for both residents and non-residents (after consultation with the competent State bodies); and, (xii) application of sanctions stipulated in the banking and currency legislation of Kazakhstan in cases of violation by banks and other persons.  
38. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan had accepted the obligations of 
Article VIII of the International Monetary Fund (IMF ) Articles of Agreement and had established full 
convertibility of tenge in current transactions in 1996.   
39. Since 4 February 2009, the exchange rate of the national currency had been pegged to the 
US dollar.  Taking into account the stability of the national currency, the favourable position of Kazakhstan's exports on world markets, and Kazakhstan's balance of payments, the NBRK had 
cancelled the exchange rate peg and, as of 28 February 2011, had moved to a managed float 
exchange rate regime.  A devaluation of the tenge in medium-term was not expected.  The NBRK continued to take all necessary measures to prevent considerable fluctuations of the national currency, which could have a negative impact on the competitiveness of Kazakhstan's industries.  
The NBRK's policy was, to the extent possible, to  further decrease its activity on the exchange 
market in order to increase the exchange rate flexibility of the national currency.   
- Requirements Related to Foreign Exchange 
40. In response to a question concerning obligations and restrictions relating to the purchase 
of foreign currency, the representative of Kazakh stan said that, pursuant to Article 17 of Law 
No. 57-III, the purchase and sale (exchange) of foreign currency had to be carried out only 
through authorized banks, authorized organizations, or their exchange offices.  She explained that 
in accordance with Law No. 57-III, "authorized banks" were second-tier banks and organizations engaged in certain types of banking operations and conducting foreign currency transactions, 
including transactions on behalf of clients.  The definition of "authorized banks" excluded 
"authorized organizations", which were allowed to conduct only currency exchange transactions.  She continued that according to Article 15 of Currency Rules No. 154, residents and non-residents 
had the right to purchase foreign currency in the domestic currency market without providing a 
currency contract and/or other payment documents related to the foreign currency purchase and sale transactions.  In filling out the application for the purchase of foreign currency through an authorized bank, juridical persons (resident and non-resident) were required to indicate the 
purpose of purchasing the foreign currency.  However, in accordance with Article 18 of Currency 
Rules No. 154, the foreign currency purchased by juridical persons could be used for purposes other than indicated in the application.   
41. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with Article 26 of Law No. 57-
III, non-residents had the right to open bank accounts in a foreign and/or national currency in authorized banks on an unrestricted basis.  Non-residents also had the right to transfer foreign and 
national currency, on an unrestricted basis: (i) from their accounts outside of Kazakhstan to their WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 14 - 
 
  bank accounts in an authorized bank; and (ii) from their bank accounts in an authorized bank to 
their bank accounts outside of Kazakhstan.   
42. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with Currency Rules No. 154, 
natural persons had the right to withdraw (credit an account) foreign currency in cash from their 
bank accounts in an authorized bank without limita tions.  Juridical persons could withdraw foreign 
currency in cash from bank accounts in authorized banks for payments to natural persons in the following cases:  (i) payments for the sale of goods in duty free shops, as well as realization of 
goods and rendering of services to passengers en route  during international transportation; 
(ii) payments between natural persons and author ized banks or authorized organizations through 
their exchange offices; (iii) payments of salary by resident juridical persons to non-resident employees, as well as by non-resident juridical persons to resident and non-resident employees in 
foreign currency; (iv) payments in foreign currency by juridical persons of expenses related to 
business trips of their employees abroad; and, (v) payments between natural persons and non-resident juridical persons conducting activity under customs control in airports, ports and 
border terminals open for international traffic.  In her view, the requirement to indicate the 
purpose for the purchase and sale of foreign currency was only imposed for statistical purposes and did not restrict the juridical persons' use of the purchased currency for other legal purposes.  
In her opinion, the current legal framework did not restrict legitimate trade transactions.   
43. The representative of Kazakhstan noted th at payments and money transmissions under 
current transactions between residents and non-residents could be carried out without restrictions, provided that they were conducted through accounts in authorized banks.  In addition, 
paragraph 1 of Article 16 of Law No. 57-III stipulated cases where payments and transmissions on 
currency transactions could be carried out, by non-cash payment, without opening bank accounts in authorized banks in Kazakhstan:  (i) payments and transmission of natural persons' money, as 
w e l l  a s  p a y m e n t s  a n d  t r a n s m i s s i o n  o f  m o n e y  i n  t h e i r  f a v o r ,  i n  n a t i o n a l  c u r r e n c y ,  w i t h i n  t h e  
territory of Kazakhstan; (ii) transfer of natural persons' money without opening a bank account in an authorized bank in cases of non-repayable transmission of money (including tax and licence 
payments, fines, transfer of inheritance, alimony, grants, etc.) and other money transmissions 
from Kazakhstan, which were not related to conducting business activity by natural persons, and in relation to which there was no requirement to assign a record number to the foreign trade contract, registration and notification; (iii) payments for the sale of goods in duty free shops as 
well as the sale of goods and rendering services to passengers en route  during international 
transportation; (iv) payments between natural persons and authorized banks or authorized 
organizations through their exchange offices; (v) pa yments of salary by resident juridical persons 
to non-resident employees, as well as by non-resident juridical persons to resident and 
non-resident employees in foreign currency; (vi) payments in foreign currency by juridical persons of expenses related to sending employees on busi ness trips outside of Kazakhstan; (vii) payments 
between natural persons and non-resident juridical persons conducting activity under customs 
control in airports, ports and border terminals open for international traffic; and, (viii) payments between resident juridical persons and non-resident juridical persons conducting business activity on the territory of Kazakhstan, in the national currency within the amounts specified by the 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The following payments and transmissions of money 
could be carried out without opening bank accounts in authorized banks of Kazakhstan:  payments by checks; payments and transmission of money for transactions with non-residents through 
foreign bank accounts opened by residents, as well as payments and transmission of money 
through the authorized bank's correspondent accounts in foreign banks; and transfer of money from the foreign bank accounts of non-residents ag ainst fulfillment of the resident's obligations.  
- Restrictions on Foreign Exchange 
44. Restrictions on currency transactions as a mechanism of reaction to external shocks could 
be imposed in Kazakhstan only as provided by Article 32 of Law No. 57-III, according to which 
restrictions on currency transactions could be imposed only in case of threat to the country's 
economic security and the stability of its financial system, and only if the situation could not be resolved through other economic policy tools.  Restrictions on currency transactions could be 
imposed within the framework of a special currency regime applied by an Act of the President.  
However, the special currency re gime had never been imposed. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 15 - 
 
  45. Asked to explain the procedures and criteria applied when the President decided to restrict 
currency transactions, the representative of Kazakhstan said that these were stipulated in Article 32 of Law No. 57-III and included a requirement to:  (i) open a bank deposit without remuneration, in an amount determined as percen tage of the amount of the currency transaction, 
in an authorized bank or the NBRK, for a fixed period of time; (ii) obtain a special currency 
transaction permit from the NBRK;  (iii) fulfil obligatory sale of foreign currency obtained by residents of Kazakhstan; or, (iv) restrict the use of foreign bank accounts and establish terms for 
the repatriation of currency proceeds and limits on the scope, amount and transaction currency 
during currency transactions.  The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that not all measures would be applied at once, but that the measures would be applied selectively, depending on the situation and the nature of the risks of destabiliz ation in the currency market.  The President could 
also impose other temporary currency restrictions .  The special currency regime measures were 
aimed at fulfilling Kazakhstan's international obligations and creating conditions for the improvement of Kazakhstan's balance of paymen ts and the situation on the domestic market. 
46. The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that the special currency regime was 
applied by the President based on consulta tions with the Government and the NBRK.  
The President's Act on a Special Currency Regime had to contain:  (i) the list of measures and 
temporary restrictions of currency transactions; (ii) procedure to carry out the requirements of the 
special currency regime, including terms for issuing the special permit; and, (iii) date of introduction and validity period of the special currency regime.  A special currency regime could not be established for more than one year.  Duri ng the year the special currency regime was in 
effect, the President was entitled to extend the te rm of the special currency regime (in case it was 
imposed for a term of less than one year) or to fully or partially abrogate it.  During the application of the special currency regime, residents and non-residents had to observe the requirements 
established by the Special Currency Regime Act of the President. 
47. Specific criteria and procedures for application of this regime were not established as it 
was difficult to forecast what could cause a threat to the economic security and financial stability of 
the State.  In her opinion, this system complied with the provisions of the WTO Agreement and did 
not conflict with Kazakhstan's obligations in respec t of the IMF.  In response to a question from a 
Member, she noted that the regime of obligatory sale of foreign currency had been temporarily imposed from April to December 1999 during the transition to the new exchange rate regime.  
Since then, there had been no reasons to apply such restrictions.   
48. EAEU member States previously had signed the Agreement on the Procedure for the 
Movement of Cash Monetary Funds and/or Monetary Instruments by Natural Persons across the 
Customs Border of the Customs Union of 5 July 2010.  Kazakhstan had ratified this Agreement 
through Law No. 389-IV "On Ratification of the Agreement on the Procedure for the Movement of Cash Monetary Funds and/or Monetary Instruments by Natural Persons across the Customs Border 
of the Customs Union" of 17 January 2011.  Under this Agreement, imports from third States to 
Kazakhstan and exports from Kazakhstan to third States of (i) cash and traveler's checks in a total amount exceeding the equivalent of US$10,000; an d, (ii) cash instruments payable on demand 
irrespective of the amount were both subject to customs declaration in written form.  
This Agreement was still in force within the framework of the EAEU.   
- Licensing, Registration and Notification of Foreign Exchange Transactions 
49. Some Members expressed concerns regarding th e large quantity of licensing requirements 
for foreign exchange transactions under the current legislation, some of which could complicate 
normal trade transactions, and asked for specific information on Kazakhstan's plans to liberalize its foreign exchange regime.   
50. The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Law No. 57-III, since 
11 August 2009 the licensing regime (authorization procedure) of currency transactions and retail trade had been fully cancelled.  At present, lice nsing requirements were applied only to exchange 
transactions with foreign currency in cash by exchange offices and authorized banks.  Kazakhstan 
provided annual reports on its currency regime to the IMF.  The IMF had never deemed 
Kazakhstan's regime inconsistent with the IMF Articles of Agreement and, in particular, with Article VIII of the Agreement.  The registration and notification requirements, as described in the 
following two paragraphs, were maintained for statis tical monitoring of external liabilities/revenues WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 16 - 
 
  of Kazakhstan and for further submission of the relevant data to the International Monetary Fund 
and the World Bank.   
51. Asked to clarify what changes had been introduced into Law No. 57-III with respect to the 
licensing regime of currency transactions and retail trade, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that during the period of gradual liberalization of the currency transactions and retail trade 
licensing regime from 2005 to 2009, the licensing requirement had been eliminated towards the 
following currency operations and activities: 
- retail trade and provision of services for which payment was performed in cash foreign 
currency.  Under the previous regime, the licence had been issued to persons who carried out their activities under the customs regime of  duty free shops, as well as on the sea, 
inland water, air, rail and road transport engaged in international transportation; 
- payments based on exports / imports exceeding the 180-day term; 
- purchase by residents of non-resident's secu rities, equity interests in investment funds – 
non-residents, contributions by residents into the share capital of non-residents, as well as 
transactions with financial derivatives between residents and non-residents; and 
- opening accounts in foreign banks by natural persons-residents and juridical 
persons-residents.  Under the previous regime, the account balance and the conditions of 
use of a foreign bank account had been determined in accordance with a licence of the 
NBRK.   
52. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that only residents were required to register major 
transactions of capital flows and provide timely no tice to the NBRK.  Residents were required to 
register transactions related to capital flow, which provided for the receipt of assets (funds) in an 
amount exceeding US$500,000 or for the transfer of  capital (tangible assets) from Kazakhstan in 
an amount exceeding US$100,000.  She added that, in accordance with Law No. 57-III, the 
following transactions of residents with non-residents were subject to registration with the NBRK:  
(i) commercial credits exceeding 180 days, except for foreign trade contracts which were subject to export-import currency control as described in paragraph 485 of this Report; (ii) direct 
investments; (iii) financial loans for more than 180 days, including financial leasing; 
(iv) acquisition of an exclusive right to intellectual  property objects; and, (v) transfer of money or 
another property in fulfilment of obligations as a participant of a joint partnership.  The NBRK registration or notification requirements extended only to residents.  Non-residents investing 
directly in Kazakhstan could further export their investments and incomes without any restrictions. 
Registration of contract on currency transaction could only be refused in cases when: (i) the submission contained unreliable information or did not include all information required in 
accordance with Law No. 57-III; and, (ii) the transaction did not comply with the legislation of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  The provisions of Article 8 of Law No. 57-III outlined the only conditions under which the registration of transactions could be refused.  If a resident submitted the 
complete set of required documents in compliance with the legislation of Kazakhstan, the 
authorized bank would not have grounds for refusing the registration.  Registered transactions could not be abrogated or nullified by the NBRK.  
53. The representative of Kazakhstan added that th e registration regime required the resident 
to submit to the NBRK a copy of the contract based on which the currency transaction would be 
carried out, as well as application form, identification documents and documents confirming incurrence, performance and discharge of liabilities  under the currency contract.  The notification 
regime required the submission of information on already conducted currency transactions.  
As part of the liberalization reform of the currency transaction regime, the registration requirement for certain currency transactions had been replaced by the notification requirement.  Residents 
were required to notify currency transactions related to:  (i) capital movements involving the 
inflow of property (funds) in an amount exceed ing the equivalent of US$500,000; (ii) transfer of 
funds (tangible assets) from Kazakhstan in an amount exceeding the equivalent of US$100,000; 
and, (iii) payments/transfers by residents to non-residents and/or by non-residents to residents 
under financial derivatives transactions, as well as for payments related to export/import of works 
and services in amounts exceeding the equiva lent of US$100,000.  The notification regime 
covered:  (i) the bank's own transactions, including financial loans and direct investments; 
(ii) securities transactions carried out on the basis of a brokerage services agreement concluded 
with a resident broker (notification by a broker); (iii) transactions with derivative financial instruments; (iv) acquisition of real estate; (v) opening of foreign bank accounts by residents; 
and, (vi) transfer of property in trust (monetary funds and tangible assets).   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 17 - 
 
  54. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with paragraph 30 of Currency 
Rules No. 154, the currency control regime did not extend to:  (i) contracts on State external loans and/or contracts on non-State external loans guaranteed by the Government, as well as transactions carried out under these contracts; (ii) commercial credits related to export or import 
requiring the assignment of a record number to the foreign trade contract; (iii) acquisition by 
non-residents of the securities of resident issuer s, which were issued under the legislation and on 
the territory of other states (including depositary receipts issued for resident issuers' securities) in 
the secondary market; (iv) acquisition by residents of  the securities of non-resident issuers, issued 
under Kazakhstani legislation (including Kazakhstani depositary receipts) in the secondary market; (v) acquisition by non-residents of government securities issued in Kazakhstan; (vi) banking transactions with derivative financial instruments; (vii) currency transactions carried out by 
overseas organizations of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and, (viii) commercial credits and financial 
loans granted by banks to non-residents for more than 180 days.  She emphasized that registration and notification were required for statistical monitoring purposes.    
- Exchange Offices 
55. Some Members asked the representative of Kazakhstan how enterprises obtained rights to 
conduct currency transactions, whether foreign organizations were able to become licensed banks 
or exchange offices, and whether the licenses could be issued to any other organizations except 
for banks.  She explained that foreign currency transactions, including those on behalf of clients, were carried out by second tier banks and other financial organizations established in Kazakhstan on the basis of a licence issued by the NBRK .  She further continued that the Agency for 
Regulation and Supervision of Financial Markets and Institutions of the Republic of Kazakhstan had 
been abolished pursuant to Decree of the Pres ident No. 25 "On Further Improvement of the 
System of State Regulation of the Financial Market of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
12 April 2011.  The functions and authority of th e Agency had been transferred to the NBRK. 
56. The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that the NBRK issued licences for 
conducting exchange transactions with foreign currency in cash only to juridical persons of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan, who were solely engaged in the organization of exchange transactions 
(exchange offices).  In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 6 of Law No. 57-III, to obtain a licence, the applicant had to meet only one qualif ication requirement: to have start-up capital as 
specified by Resolution No. 63.   
57. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that such juridical persons could be established 
only as limited liability partnerships without the right to establish representative offices in Kazakhstan or abroad, or to participate in the charter capital of other juridical persons, but with 
the right to establish branches in Kazakhstan.  According to Article 7, Chapter 2 of Resolution 
No. 106, resident and non-resident natural and juridical persons could be the founders of an authorized organization, except for juridical persons which previously had been founders (one of 
the founders) of an authorized organization whos e licence had been revoked less than three years 
before the date of application for a State registration permit or for a licence for organizing exchange transactions with foreign currency.  A general licence for conducting exchange 
transactions did not restrict the number of exchange offices of the applicant.   
58. Branches and representative offices of foreign banks could not carry out foreign currency 
exchange transactions until they registered as juridical persons of Kazakhstan and obtained the 
relevant permit.   
59. The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that if Kazakhstan introduced restrictions on 
foreign exchange or payments, such restrictions would be applied in conformity with WTO requirements.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
60. A Member requested that Kazakhstan provide information on regional initiatives in the 
area of foreign exchange and payments policy.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that according to Section XIV "Monetary Policy" and Annex No. 15 "Protocol on Measures Aimed at Coordinated Monetary Policy" of the EAEU Treaty , which came into effect on 1 January 2015, the 
member States developed and carried out coordinated monetary policy within the EAEU.  Article 64 
of Section XIV stipulated that the coordination of exchange rate policy was conducted by a body, which consisted of the Heads of Central Banks of the member States.  The Advisory Council on WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 18 - 
 
  Monetary (Currency) Policy (hereinafter: the Advisory Council) had been established within the 
framework of the Single Economic Space in accordance with the Treaty "On Coordinated Monetary ( C u r r e n c y )  P o l i c y  o f  M e m b e r  S t a t e s  o f  t h e  A g reement on Coordinated Principles of Monetary 
(Currency) Policy of 9 December 2010", which had been signed on 12 December 2011 and had 
entered into force on 1 January 2012.  The Advi sory Council would continue to function as a 
consultative body within the EAEU with the objective to provide coordination of monetary (currency) policy of the member States.  The de cisions of the Advisory Council were made based 
on consensus and were not binding.  It operated on a regular basis with meetings held once per 
quarter.  The representative of Kazakhstan further clarified that a decision-making authority in the area of monetary and fiscal policy remained in the national competence of the member States. 
- Investment Regime 
61. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the general legislation comprising the 
investment regime of Kazakhstan included the Cons titution of Kazakhstan of 30 August 1995; Civil 
Code of Kazakhstan  (General Part) No. 269-XII of 27 December 1994, as last amended on 
25 March 2011 (hereinafter: Civil Code) and Special Part No. 409 of 1 July 1999, as last amended 
on 2 April 2010; Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 (hereinafter: Tax Code) and a number 
of other legislative acts, including:  Law No. 373-II "On Investments" of 8 January 2003, as last 
amended on 20 February 2012 (hereinafter: Law "On Investments"); Law No. 112-IV  "On Competition" of 25 December 2008; Law No. 233- I "On National Security of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 26 June 1998; Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 
24 June 2010 (hereinafter: Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use"); Law No. 167-III 
"On Concessions" of 7 July 2006; and Law No. 124-III "On Private Entrepreneurship" of 31 January 2006.  Provisions relevant to the investment regime contained in EAEU Agreements 
and Treaties, to which Kazakhstan was a party, also applied (see Section "Tariff Exemptions" of 
this Report). 
62. The representative of Kazakhstan added that Law "On Investments" provided the specific 
elements of the legal basis for Kazakhstan's investment policy.  This Law regulated relations with 
regard to investments in Kazakhstan, determined the legal and economic basis for the attraction of investments, guaranteed the protection of investors' rights when investing into Kazakhstan, and established measures of State support for investments and procedures for dispute resolution.  
Law "On Investments" did not establish local content or export performance requirements as 
measures of State support for investments.  In response to a question, the representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that Law "On Investments" di d not contain provisions specifying contractual 
rights, but rather described procedures for conclusion and termination of investment contracts. 
63. Asked to clarify the definition of investments, and whether or not it included all goods, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that Law "On Investments" defined investments as all kinds of 
property (except for goods for personal use), including property under financial leasing as of the 
date of the contract; property rights invested by an investor into the charter capital of a juridical 
person; and the increase of fixed assets used in entrepreneurial activities, as well as fixed assets produced and received within a concession agreement by the concessionaire (including its legal 
successor).   
64. She further stated that, in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 4 of Law 
"On Investments", an investor was granted full and unconditional protection of the rights and 
interests, ensured by the Constitution of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan, this Law and other legal acts 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as international agreements ratified by the Republic of Kazakhstan.  This legal protection of investments included full and unconditional protection of the 
rights of investors, and guarantee of indemnity for damages suffered by investors due to issuance 
by public officials of acts that did not comply wi th the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
Pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article 922 of the Ci vil Code, such damages had to be compensated by 
court decision using funds from the State Budget.   
65. A Member requested to clarify whether in accordance with Law "On Investments" the 
stability of the terms and conditions of contracts concluded between investors and state bodies was guaranteed, and whether any modification made  into the list of priority activities or 
consequences of the list becoming void affected concluded investment contracts.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that legal certainty for investors was guaranteed by Law WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 19 - 
 
  "On Investments".  In accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 4 of the Law, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan guaranteed stability of the terms an d conditions of agreements concluded between 
investors and State bodies, except for agreements  that were amended by mutual consent of the 
parties.  These guarantees for investors did not extend to: (i) amendments to the legal acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and/or their entry into force, nor to amendments made to international 
agreements that changed the terms and conditions  of import, production, and sale of excisable 
goods; and (ii) amendments and addenda to Kazakhstan's legislation introduced for national 
security, environmental safety, public health and morality purposes.  In these exceptional cases, 
stipulated in Article 4 of the Law, the signed contracts could be modified, i.e., the State could enact new legislation or amend applied legislation.   It was important to note that up to date 
Kazakhstan had not applied above-mentioned exceptional cases and, consequently, had not 
modified the terms of signed investment contracts.   The legal certainty guaranteed to investors by 
the legislation of Kazakhstan also meant that any modification made into the list of investment priority activities or consequences of the list becoming void, did not affect concluded investment 
contracts.   
66. Law "On Investments" also guaranteed the tran sparency of the activities of State bodies 
and the access to information related to investment activities (company registration, charter 
documents, licensing, etc.); provided a guarantee for investors to use income at their full 
discretion; guaranteed protection of investors' rights in case of nationalization and requisition; and investment dispute settlement regulations, includ ing the possibility of international arbitration 
provided by this Law.  Agreements on promot ion and mutual protection of investments were 
concluded with certain countries in order to guarantee investment protection.  These Agreements 
provided guarantees of investors' rights, including the recovery of investments when faced with political (regulatory) risks, nationalization and expropriation; the prevention of discrimination; and 
the regulation of disputes including appeal to international arbitration courts. 
67. In response to a request by a Member for more information on nationalization, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that nationalization procedures were stipulated in the Civil Code 
and Law "On State Property".  In accordance with Article 54 of Law "On State Property", 
nationalization was carried out in the public interest, for national security purposes, in compliance with the established legal procedures and performed without discrimination.  Nationalization was subject to preliminary and equivalent compensation  by the Republic of Kazakhstan of the market 
value of the nationalized property and other losse s.  Reimbursement of the value of the property 
subject to nationalization and other relevant losses was carried out in full, prior to transfer of ownership rights to the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
68. Asked to clarify if legislation on evaluation activities was developed and what effect it had 
on reimbursements, the representative of Kazakhst an said that evaluation of property purchased 
or alienated by the State in case of nationalization or requisition, was performed by a valuator in 
accordance with Law No. 109-II "On Evaluation Ac tivity in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
30 November 2000.  The market value of the property  subject to nationalization or requisition was 
established without regard to the change of value as a result of announcement of the forthcoming nationalization or requisition.  Upon the requ est of the owner of the property subject to 
nationalization, a re-valuation of the value of the property could be conducted on the date of 
reimbursement.    
- Investment preferences 
69. The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that Law "On Investments" provided 
that the State's investment support was directed towards the creation of favourable conditions for investors investing in new technologies, the expansion and renovation of existing production 
facilities, training and protection of the environm ent.  The State support of investments involved 
granting of investment preferences for a list of "priority" investment activities, which were available to all juridical persons of Kazakhstan provided they met the objective criteria.  As Law "On Investments" did not set minimum capital requirements for foreign investment, its scope of 
application, including investment preferences, al so covered small and medium-sized enterprises.  
Investment incentives were granted to the investment activity in the list of priority activities (approved by Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 and amended by Government 
Resolution No. 809 of 6 August 2010) or the list of strategic investment projects.  She further 
explained that the list of strategic investment  projects previously adopted by Government WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 20 - 
 
  Resolution No. 1293 of 1 September 2009 had become void and that a new list of strategic 
investment projects would be developed by her Government.   
70. Previously, investment tax preferences had been  in the form of full exemptions from the 
payment of property tax, land tax and corporate income tax and had been enforced from the date 
the investor started to operate the facility.  However, as of 1 January 2009, these investment tax 
preferences had been eliminated from Law "On Inve stments".  Therefore, they had no longer been 
granted since 1 January 2009.  In the meantime, a transitional arrangement had been introduced 
for investment contracts concluded before 1 January 2009.  Thus, according to Article 23 of 
Law "On Investments", tax preferences granted under an investment contract concluded with the authorized body on investments before 1 January  2009 would be effective until the expiration of 
the term specified in the contract.  There were approximately 100 investment contracts granting 
tax preferences concluded prior to 1 January 2009, 58 of which were still being in the process of 
implementation.  None of the investment contracts that had been concluded prior to 1 January 2009 contained local content requirement.  
71. The fundamental criterion for granting all types of investment preferences was that an 
investment activity should be listed in the list of priority activities.  The following types of investment preferences could be granted within the investment contract: 
- customs duty exemptions;  
- in-kind state grants;  - preferences on land tax and property tax for juridical persons implementing strategic 
investment projects; and, 
- industrial preferences for juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects in 
socially and economically disadvantaged regions. 
72. Customs duty exemptions and in-kind state grants were granted, provided that the 
investment activity was listed in the list of priority activities approved by Government Resolution 
No. 436 of 8 May 2003.  Customs duty exemptio ns were granted for a period not exceeding 
five years from the date of conclusion of the investment contract.  In-kind state grants were 
granted for the implementation period of an invest ment project from the date of conclusion of the 
investment contract.  For land tax preferences, pr operty tax preferences and industrial preferences 
for implementing strategic projects, an additional criterion was established, i.e., an investment project had to be included into the list of stra tegic investment projects.  If the project was not 
listed in the list of strategic investments projects, a juridical person could not apply for such 
preferences.   
73. On 20 February 2012, the concept of strategic in vestment projects, i.e., projects that had 
strategic impact upon the economic development of Kazakhstan, had been re-introduced into Law 
"On Investments".  Juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects could benefit from the new preferences on land and property tax and industrial preferences.  The procedures for 
granting preferences on land tax and property tax were stipulated in the Tax Code.  Preferences on 
land tax and property tax could be granted for a period not exceeding seven years from the date of conclusion of the investment contract.  Industrial preferences were granted to juridical persons implementing investment strategic projects in so cially and economically disadvantaged regions in 
the form of compensation or payments for such expenditures as gas, electricity, purchase of land, 
buildings and facilities.  The list of the regions that were socially and economically disadvantaged was approved by Government Resolution No. 601 of 10 May 2012.  The procedure for granting 
industrial preferences was approved by Government Resolution No. 61 of 
30 January 2013.  Industrial preferences could be  granted for a period not exceeding seven years 
from the date of launching the investment strategic project.  To date, there had been no industrial 
preferences, land and property tax preferences granted. 
74. The lists of priority activities and strategic investment projects were intended to be revised 
regularly.  The list of priority activities approv ed by Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 
had been amended in 2009 by Government Resolution No. 925, and again in 2010 by Government 
Resolution No. 809.  Changes had been made with regard to types of activities, but the number of 
activities (93) had not been changed.  The list of  priority activities was amended by Government 
Resolution No. 1416 of 8 November 2012.  The updated list of priority activities  is attached to this 
Working Party Report (Annex 2).   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 21 - 
 
  75. According to Article 19 of Law "On Investments", an applicant for investment preferences 
was required to submit documents to the authorized  body in charge of investments determined by 
the Government to prove the juridical person's fina ncial, technical and organizational capability to 
implement the investment project or the strategi c investment project. The authorized body was 
responsible for concluding contracts on granting investment preferences based on the submitted 
information and for monitoring their implementation.  It also took decisions on granting investment preferences and the possible extensions  of their terms.  Currently, the Investments 
Committee under the Ministry of Investments and De velopment was the authorized body in charge 
of investments.   
76. In order to bring into compliance with Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 
"On Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009, Law "On Investments" 
had been amended on 20 February 2012.  In acco rdance with those amendments, customs duty 
exemptions were granted for technological equipment, its components and spare parts, raw 
materials and inputs imported for implementation of an investment project or a strategic 
investment project within the investment contracts concluded with the authorized body.  In-kind grants could be granted by the Government to investors in the form of land plots, buildings, 
machinery, equipment, computer machines, measuring and regulating units, transportation 
vehicles (except for automobiles), production an d household equipment.  The authorized body, 
based on domestic legislation and with the approval  of the relevant State bodies, also could confer 
in-kind State grants for either ownership or temporary use.   
77. She further explained that procedures and conditions for simpler and broader application 
of investment tax preferences were established by the Tax Code.  The Tax Code provided tax preferences in the form of deductions on corporat e income tax.  Application of the tax preferences 
did not require the juridical person to conclude an investment contract with the competent 
authority on investments in order to benefit from them. In accordance with the Tax Code, application of these investment tax preferences was not conditioned to local content requirements. 
These tax preferences provided for the possibility of judicial persons to deduct from the taxable 
income the value of buildings and facilities, machinery and equipment used in production, as well as related costs for reconstruction and modernizat ion.  The duration of tax preferences depended 
on the method of deduction applied by the juri dical person.  Deductions could be carried out 
according to one of two methods:  (i) deduction after putting a facility into operation; or 
(ii) deduction prior to putting a facility into oper ation.  According to the method of deduction after 
putting a facility into operation, the original costs (to be paid for the purchase, construction, 
assembling and installation of buildings, facilities , machinery and equipment) could be deducted in 
equal amounts during the first three-year tax period, or on a lump-sum basis.  According to the second method, i.e., deduction prior to putting a facility into operation, the costs (to be paid for 
the purchase, construction, assembling and installation as well as reconstruction and 
modernization of buildings, facilities, machin ery and equipment before putting them into 
operation) could be deducted in the tax period during which actual costs were incurred.  These tax preferences were applicable to industrial buil dings and constructions, machinery and equipment 
which were put into operation for the first time and were used for at least three years.  
78. Investment preferences in the automobile sector had been granted under the free 
warehouse regime, which included local conten t requirements.  In addition, preferences 
conditioned upon the use of local materials are described in Section "Free Zones, Special Economic 
Areas" of this Report.  The customs duty ex emptions granted under Law "On Investments" 
described above were distinct structurally and legally from the exemptions resulting from local 
content requirements in the free warehouse regime and the local content requirements in 
Kazakhstan's automotive investment programme de scribed in Section "Trade Related Investment 
Measures" of this Report.   
79. The representative of Kazakhstan added that according to Article 3 of 
Law "On Investments", foreign investment activities could be limited or banned in certain areas 
due to national security considerations.  Pursuant to Article 5 of Law No. 451-I "On the Mass Media" of 23 July 1999, foreign natural and juridical persons were not allowed to directly or 
i n d i r e c t l y  o w n ,  u s e ,  o r  m a n a g e  m o r e  t h a n  2 0 %  o f  t h e  c a p i t a l  o f  a  m a s s  m e d i a  e n t e r p r i s e  i n  
Kazakhstan.  Pursuant to Article 5 of Law No. 85-II "On Guarding Activities" of 19 October 2000, foreign juridical persons, domestic juridical persons with foreign participation, as well as foreign 
and stateless individuals, could not engage in secu rity and safety (guarding) activities.  She added WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 22 - 
 
  that, pursuant to Law No. 233-I "On National Security of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
26 June 1998, in the field of telecommunications, total foreign equity was limited to 49% of the charter capital of juridical persons supplying services as operators of long distance and/or international communications owning terrestrial communication lines (cable, including optical fibre, 
and radio relay).  
80. According to Law No. 339-IV "On Use of Air Space and Activities of Aviation" of 
15 July 2010, foreign participation in the authorized  capital of air companies, performing regular 
air transportation was limited to 49%.  She also noted that, pursuant to Article 36 of Law No. 136-
I "On Pensions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 June 1997, the total charter (registered) 
capital of pension funds with foreign capital participation could not exceed 25% of the aggregate charter capital of all pension funds in Kazakhstan.  For investment management companies 
managing pension assets, this figure was set at 50%.  In addition, at least one third of the Board 
of Directors of such pension funds or investment management companies had to be made up of Kazakhstani nationals.  However, she noted that the provisions of Law No. 107-III 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues 
of Licensing and Consolidated Supervision" of 23 December 2005 and Law No. 128-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues 
of Insurance" of 20 February 2006 had eliminated similar restrictions on foreign participation 
affecting banks and insurance/reinsurance companies.  She added that Law No. 204-III "On Amendments to Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Architectural, Town-building and Construction Activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan'" of 11 December 2006 had eliminated the 
49% foreign equity cap in architectural, urban development and construction services joint 
ventures.   
81. She noted that pursuant to Article 23 of Land Code No. 442-II of 20 June 2003, private 
ownership of land plots located in the border zone and boundary territories of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan by foreigners and foreign juridical persons was prohibited.  Also foreign citizens and foreign juridical persons could not privately own lands used for farming/agricultural production or 
forest planning purposes.  Foreigners might be granted the right of temporary land use for 
farming/agricultural production purposes for a period of up to 10 years.  Lease-holding of land plots for agricultural purposes adjacent to the State border of Kazakhstan was also restricted for foreigners.   
82. A Member sought clarification on the definitions of border zone and borderland.  
The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in accordance with paragraph 29 of Article 2 of 
Law No. 70-V "On the State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 January 2013, the 
borderland was a part of the territory directly adjacent to the State border on the land plot.  In the 
areas where the State border passes through border rivers, lakes and other waters, the borderland was defined as a part of the territory directly adjacent to the coast of these waters as well as 
territories located in the islands where the State Border regime was established.  In accordance 
with paragraph 28 of Article 2 of Law "On the St ate Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan", a 
border zone was a part of the territory of the Re public of Kazakhstan adjacent to the borderland 
within the territory of administrative districts. 
83. In response to the question of a Member concerning the minimum distance from the 
border that was prohibited for lease or purchase by foreigners, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that according to Government Resolution of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 365 
"On Establishment of the Limits of Borderla nd, Quarantine Zone and Border Zone" of 
16 April 2014, such distance was established wi thin the territory of 27 km and/or within 
administrative territories (districts) adjacent to th e State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan, to 
the Kazakhstan's banks of the border rivers, lakes and other basins; and on the coast of the 
Caspian Sea - 25 km adjacent to the shoreline of the Caspian Sea. 
84. In response to questions on the existence of any restrictions or conditions, which did not 
apply to domestic juridical persons, but were applicable to foreign-owned juridical persons of 
Kazakhstan investing in land or leasing subsurface rights, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that all restrictions applied equally to domestically-owned and foreign-owned juridical persons of Kazakhstan.  She added that Article 12 of Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" had been 
amended in line with the provisions of Law No. 233-I "On National Security of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 26 June 1998, which stipulated that economic security extended to the preservation and increase of the energy re sources of Kazakhstan.  According to these WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 23 - 
 
  amendments, the Government of Kazakhstan had the priority in purchasing the rights to 
subsurface utilization, when sold by their current holder.   
85. A Member asked the representative of Kazakhst an to clarify whether any financial actions 
affecting a change in ownership of an enterprise which owned the rights to subsurface utilization, 
such as the sale of private equity in the enterprise, would also trigger the application of 
Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use".  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that in accordance with Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use", if subsurface user intended to alienate 
the subsurface use right (a part thereof) and/or an object related to subsurface use rights
3, the 
State had a priority right to purchase the subsurfa ce use right (a part thereof) and/or an object 
related to subsurface use rights.  Subsurface user  that intended to alienate the subsurface use 
right (a part thereof) and/or an object related to subsurface use rights had to submit application to 
the competent authority.  The decision on acquisition of alienable subsurface use right (a part 
thereof) and/or an object related to subsurface use right was taken by the competent authority on behalf of the Government of Kazakhstan.  Therefore, any financial actions resulting in change of 
ownership of an enterprise which owned the rights to subsurface utilization, such as the sale of 
private equity in the enterprise, would bring into  effect the provision of Law "On Subsurface and 
Subsurface Use", giving the Government of Kazakhstan the priority right to subsurface utilization, 
when sold by the current holder.  
86. A Member expressed concerns regarding the effect that the amendments to 
Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" could have on the investment climate in Kazakhstan.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" 
would not negatively affect the investment climate in Kazakhstan, as it did not discriminate 
between foreign and domestic investors.  The Law provided only for transparency and compliance with the terms of subsurface use contracts by subsurface users in order to ensure stable economic 
growth.  As of November 2011, 142 companies operated in the subsurface sector, among which 
86 companies had foreign participation.   
87. In response to questions from some Members, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that Kazakhstan would provide foreign invested juridical persons of Kazakhstan, producing crude 
oil and gas in accordance with the national legislation of Kazakhstan, non-discriminatory access to pipelines which were partly or fully owned and re gulated by the Government in accordance with 
the national legislation
4 within the available remaining capacities of such pipelines, based on 
existing rights of access.  The access would be allocated in a fair and equitable manner, and 
proportional to the production capacity of companies producing crude oil and gas in Kazakhstan.  When applying measures relating to such pipeline transportation, including access to pipelines for 
foreign invested juridical persons of Kazakhstan producing crude oil and gas in Kazakhstan, the 
Government of Kazakhstan would ensure that the following principles were respected:  (i) fully transparent legal and regulatory measures on access and pipeline transportation tariffs; 
(ii) non-discrimination with respect to the origin of crude oil and gas production within the territory 
of Kazakhstan and the destination; and (iii) application of non-discriminatory transportation tariffs with respect to foreign and domestic investors.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
88. The representative of Kazakhstan added that, according to Article 193-1 of the Civil Code, 
the sale/purchase of shares and any alienation of objects of strategic importance were subject to approval and authorization by the Government.  The sectors of strategic importance were defined 
in Article 193-1 of the Civil Code.  The list of objects of strategic importance was approved by 
Resolution of the Government. 
                                               
3 Items related to subsurface use rights mean participating interests (shareholdings) in a juridical 
person holding the subsurface use right,  as well as in a juridical person which may directly and/or indirectly 
determine, and/or influence on, decisions adopted by such  subsurface user if the principal activity of that 
juridical person is related to subsurface use in the Re public of Kazakhstan.  Items related to subsurface use 
rights also include securities evidencing the title to shares or securities convertible into shares of a juridical person holding a subsurface use right as well as a ju ridical person who may dire ctly and/or indirectly 
determine, and/or influence on, the decisions adopted by such a subsurface user if the principal activity of such juridical person is related to subsurfa ce use in the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
4 This applies only to pipelines regulated as natural monopolies within the framework of Law No. 272-I 
"On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 24 - 
 
  89. A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that the list of objects of strategic importance was 
currently approved and whether it was pub licly available and regularly updated.  
The representative of Kazakhstan responded that the list of strategic objects transferred into the 
authorized capital of and/or owned by national holdings and/or national companies or their 
affiliates, as well as other juridical persons with State participation, and strategic objects owned by 
juridical persons non-affiliated to the State, as well as by individuals, was approved by the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of  Kazakhstan No. 651 of 30 June 2008.  The list 
was regularly updated (as last amended on 21 Ju ly 2011) and publicly available on the official 
websites of the Ministry of Nati onal Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan (www.minplan.kz) and 
t h e  M i n i s t r y  o f  J u s t i c e  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  ( w w w . m i n j u s t . k z )  i n  b o t h  K a z a k h  a n d  Russian.   
- State Ownership, State-Tradin g Entities and Privatization  
(a) Privatization  90. The representative of Kazakhstan said that privatization-related issues were regulated by 
Law No. 413-IV "On State Property" of 1 March 2011 (hereinafter: Law "On State Property"), 
which had replaced Law No. 2721 "On Privatization" of 23 December 1995; the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (General Part) No. 269-X II of 27 December 1994 (hereinafter: Civil Code); 
Law No. 415-II "On Joint Stock Companies" of 13 May 2003 (hereinafter: Law "On Joint Stock 
Companies"); Law No. 220-I "On Limited Liability and Additional Liability Partnerships" of 22 April 1998 (hereinafter: Law "On Liability Partnerships"); and, Law No. 461-II "On Securities Market" of 2 July 2003.  
91. State property consisted of both Republican and communal property.  Republican property 
included the republican budget, the National Fu nd of the Republic of Kazakhstan, property 
allocated to republican State enterprises and republican State-run institutions, property of which 
was in republican ownership, and other property  of the Republic of Kazakhstan, except for 
property at the communal level, i.e., the administrative territorial level.  Communal property included local budget, property allocated to communal State enterprises and communal State-run 
institutions, property of which was in the communal ownership and other property of the 
administrative territorial units. 
92. The representative of Kazakhstan said that pursuant to Law  "On State Property", State 
property could be alienated in the following forms:  (i) privatization via auction, tender, 
two-staged bid, on the stock exchange, or by sales of derivatives; (ii) privatization via direct sales; 
or (iii) other forms of alienation without conducting a tender, for instance, transfer of State property as contribution to the charter capital of li mited liability partnerships (LLPs) or purchase of 
shares of joint-stock companies (JSCs).  Privatization was the sale of State property to natural 
persons and non-state juridical persons conducted in accordance with the special procedures established by Law "On State Property".  She further explained that State property was privatized 
upon decision of the authorized body on State prop erty or a local executive body – in the case of 
municipal property, except for:  (i) natural monopolies or enterprises with dominant position on the respective market, which were privatized based on the decision of the Government; and 
(ii) transfer of State property as a contribution to the charter capital of LLPs or purchase of shares 
of JSCs, which were privatized based on the decisi on of the Government or a local executive body  
in case of municipal property.  The detailed descr iption of the rules and procedures governing the 
privatization process was available to the public from the State Property and Privatization 
Committee at the website:  www.gosreestr.kz.  
93. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the rules for privatization and restrictions on 
privatization outlined in Law "On State Property" did not apply to national companies and firms 
(JSCs/LLPs) held by national managing holdings or national holdings, i.e., to subsidiaries of 
national managing holdings or national holdings.  Alienation of the property of national companies or firms (JSCs/LLPs) held by national managing holdings or national holdings was performed on the basis of the regulations outlined for JSCs/LLPs in Laws "On Joint Stock Companies", 
"On Limited Liability Partnerships", "On Securities Market" and the Civil Code.  In addition, Law 
"On State property" stipulated specific provisions for strategic objects.  Disposal of shares of national companies, transferred as a contribution to the charter capital of national managing 
holdings and national holdings, that were strategi c objects, was permitted only by the decision of 
the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 25 - 
 
  94. Concerning the results of privatization, th e representative of Kazakhstan informed 
Members that between 1991 and 2005, Kazakhstan had held six two-year privatization programmes.  Three of the programmes had focused on large scale privatization.  The last two programmes had been developed within the fram ework of the State Property Management and 
Privatization Concept.  During the period from 1991 to 2012, a total of 45,631 entities, or 
approximately 85% of State property, had been privat ized (Annex 3(A) of this Report).  Data on 
State property privatization in various sectors of the economy for 2000-2012 were provided in 
Annex 3(B) of this Report.  Data on State enterp rises and enterprises with State participation were 
provided in Annex 3(C), Annex 3(D) and Annex 3(E) of this Report.  As a result of the privatization process by 1 January 2013, the total number of existing State enterprises had been 6,827.  
By 1 January 2013, among the 364 JSCs with State participation, the State owned 100% of shares 
in 236 JSCs; from 50% to 100% of the shares in 67 JSCs; 25% to 50% of the shares in 22 JSCs; 
and less than 25% of the shares in 39 JSCs.  
95. Asked about operations of State-owned and State-controlled enterprises in the agricultural 
sector and the existence of plans for their privatization, the representative of Kazakhstan replied 
that agricultural production was predominantly privately owned.  Major commercial activities, including production, distribution and food cate ring were no longer under State ownership or 
control.  State intervention in the welfare of the agricultural sector was conducted through 
National Company "Food Contract Corporation", JSC "KazAgroFinance" and JSC "KazAgroProduct", 
as outlined in Sub-section (b) below.   
96. With respect to restrictions in the privatizat ion process, the representative of Kazakhstan 
informed Members that paragraph 3 of Article 94 of Law "On State Property" determined the 
category of State property that could not be alienated or privatized.  However, this category of property could be transferred as a contribution to the charter capital of a national managing 
holding, a national holding or a national company, a limited liability partnership or a joint stock 
company. 
97. State property not subject to privatization-  was approved by Decree of the President 
No. 422 "On the List of State Property Objects No t Subject to Privatization" of 28 July 2000.  
The list of State property objects that could not be privatized included: (i) land (except for land in private ownership on grounds stipulated by the legislation of Kazakhstan), subsurface and water resources, flora and fauna; (ii) natural environmen tal zones under special protection; (iii) military 
organizations and property essential for national security; (iv) mainline railroads and highways, as 
well as accompanying engineering structures, as part of the State international routes network or designed for defence purposes; (v) navigable waterways, as well as lighthouses, navigation 
devices and seamarks that ensured safety and regulated navigation; (vi) mainline oil and gas 
pipelines, and interregional electricity networ ks of 220, 500 and 1,150kV voltage; (vii) water 
reservoirs with hydraulic facilities, water control pivots, dams and water barrages; (viii) first-aid 
medical organizations operating in rural areas, specialised medical centres (maternity welfare, 
radiological medicine, oncology, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and STD centres, blood banks, and mental asylums), organizations and centres acting as the sole provider of medical services in a given area; (ix) social protection services, children's homes, orphanages, nursing homes, hospitals and 
health resorts for the disabled, war veterans, children, and the elderly; (x) secondary schools; and 
(xi) historic and cultural sites protected by the State.  
98. Asked about "strategic entities", the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
Kazakhstan's legislation provided a definition of the term "strategic object", which according to 
Article 193-1 of the Civil Code, was a property of social and economic importance for the sustainable development of Kazakhstan's society, the possession, use or disposal of which would 
affect the national security interests of Kazakh stan.  Strategic objects consisted of main-line 
railroad networks; mainline oil pipelines; mainline gas pipelines; national electric network; mainline communication lines; national postal network; international airports; international sea ports; air navigation devices of the air traffic control system; devices and navigation signs 
regulating and ensuring the safety of ships; entities using nuclear energy; space industry entities; 
water facilities; public roads; and shares (common stocks, ordinary shares) in juridical persons- which owned strategic objects; shares (common stocks, ordinary shares) owned by natural and 
juridical persons, which could directly or indirectly determine decisions or influence decisions of 
juridical persons which owned strategic objects.  Strategic objects could be either in State or private ownership.  Strategic objects could be en cumbered by third party rights or disposed/sold 
only on the basis of the decision of the Government.  The Government of Kazakhstan had the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 26 - 
 
  priority right to purchase a strategic object at the market price, in case the owner intended to sell 
such an object.  Strategic objects were enumerated in Resolution of the Government No. 651 of 30 June 2008.   
99. Concerning the participation of foreign persons in the privatization process, she said that in 
accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 188 of Law "On State Property", restrictions applied with 
respect to the sale of strategic objects to foreigners and stateless persons, juridical persons with non-resident participation and their affiliated persons.  Such restrictions applied in a limited 
number of sectors of Kazakhstan's economy and were described in Section "Investment Regime" 
of this Report.  
100.  In reply to questions on main pipelines, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Law 
No. 20-V "On Main Pipeline" of 22 June 2012 (hereinafter: Law "On Main Pipeline") was aimed at 
ensuring effective, secure and safe operation of main pipelines.  Law "On Main Pipeline" also 
regulated issues related to the ownership of main pipelines as well as the procedure for engineering, construction, operation, and connection of new pipelines to existing pipelines, 
maintenance control and liquidation of the pipelines.  According to Article 12 of Law "On Main 
Pipeline", main pipeline was an indivisible property and could be in public or private ownership.  Main pipeline could not be in ownership of natural or juridical persons registered in accordance 
with the laws of a foreign country.  Main pipeline, shares of juridical persons, which owned the 
main pipeline as well as shares of natural or juridical persons which could directly or indirectly determine decisions or could influence the decisions of juridical persons which owned the main pipeline, were considered as "strategic objects" as described in paragraph 98.  She also noted that 
pursuant to Article 16 of Law "On Main Pipeline", the Government had the priority right to 
participate in an amount not less than 51% ownership in construction projects of main pipelines.  National operator operated the main pipelines on behalf of the Government.  National operator 
was a juridical person and its controlling shares were owned by the Government, or national 
managing holding or national company.  In case the Government forewent its priority right, the person who planned to construct a main pipeline could offer participation in the project to other 
persons or perform the project independently.  However, the conditions for participation in 
construction of a pipeline offered to other persons could not be more favorable than those offered to the Government.  The Government could take a decision to participate in the construction project with the share less than 51%.  However, the priority right of the Government did not 
extend to cases of expansion of existing main pipelines. According to Article 4 of Law No. 272-I 
"On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998, main pipelines were natural monopolies. 
101.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed the readiness of Kazakhstan to ensure the 
transparency of its privatization process.  Kazakhstan would provide annual reports to WTO Members (along the lines of the information provided to the Working Party) on developments 
in its privatization process for as long as the process continued.  The Working Party took note of 
this commitment.   
(b) State-owned and State-controlled Ente rprises, Enterprises with Special and 
Exclusive Privileges 
102.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that State property in Kazakhstan included the 
property of State enterprises and State-owned shares (right of participation) in joint stock companies (JSCs) and limited liability partnerships (LLPs) with State participation.  JSCs with 
majority (i.e., 50% or more) of State participation included national managing holdings, national 
holdings, and national companies that did not belong to national managing holdings or national holdings. State enterprises were regulated by Civil Code (General Part) No.269-XII of 
27 December 1994 (hereinafter: Civil Code), Law No. 413-IV "On State Property" of 1 March 2011 
(hereinafter: Law "On State Property") and Law No . 527-IV "On National Security of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 6 January 2012.  JSCs or LLPs with 50% or more of State participation were governed by Law No. 415-II "On Joint Stock Companies" of 13 May 2003 (hereinafter: Law 
"On Joint Stock Companies"), Law No. 220-I "On Limited and Additional Liability Partnerships" of 
22 April 1998 (hereinafter: Law "On Limited Liability Partnerships"), Law No. 461-II "On Securities Market" of 2 July 2003 and the Civil Code.   
103.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that State enterprises were considered as 
State-owned, while JSCs/LLPs with 50% or more of State participation were considered as WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 27 - 
 
  State-controlled enterprises.  State enterprises were defined by Law "On State Property" as 
enterprises established by the Government or local executive bodies to render State services with 
the objective to address the social and economic needs of the society and the State.  The State 
was responsible for the liabilities of State enterprises5 and had the right to dispose their property.  
The property assigned to State enterprises entirely belonged to the State, which was indivisible, 
e.g., could not be distributed among employees of State enterprises or alienated by them.  State enterprises were prohibited to conclude transactions not related to the subject or purpose of 
their activity, assigned by the Government or local executive bodies.   
104.  Annex 3(F) of this Report contains the list of spheres where State enterprises could be 
established.  When State enterprises were engaged in commercial activity, the sales of produced goods and services were performed independently, except for transactions aimed at disposing the 
property, where the approval of the competent auth ority was required by law.   This requirement 
resulted from the need to preserve the property of the State and constituted the difference between State enterprises and other types of juridical persons with State participation.   
105.  In reply to a question as to whether Kazakhstan agreed that these firms would be 
considered as "State-owned" for the purposes of being covered by the commitment in paragraph 142, the representative of Kazakhst an clarified that property of State (owned) 
enterprises was fully owned and operated by the Government and their activities were under strict 
control of the Government.  State-owned enterprises were established in the juridical form of a State enterprise which was a separate legal entity from JSCs and LLPs with State participation.  State enterprises could not belong to a national managing holding or a national holding.  
106.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that th e legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
did not provide the possibility for the Governme nt to exercise special control or special 
management of the activities of JSCs and LLPs with State participation, whose shares in full or in 
part were owned by the State.  In accordance wi th Kazakhstan's legislation, the JSCs and LLPs 
with State participation were not State enterprises due to the following reasons: 
(i) the property of JSCs and LLPs did not belong  to the State, hence, the Government did not 
have the right to dispose of their property;  
(ii) the degree of control over operations of JSCs and LLPs was limited to competence of the 
Government to act as a shareholder or participant;  
(iii) shareholders of JSCs were not responsible for liabilities of the company and borne the risks 
of losses related to the activities of the comp any to the extent of the value of the shares 
owned; and  
(iv) these companies were subject to the rules of corporate governance and the general rules 
of Law "On Joint Stock Companies" or Law "On Limited Liability Partnerships".  
For example, Board of Directors of JSCs includ ed independent directors.  Property of such 
companies was managed by the management board.  
Kazakhstan used the term "State-controlled enterpri ses" with respect to JSCs or LLPs with 50% or 
more of State participation. 
107.  The representative of Kazakhstan further expl ained that according to Article 171 of  Law 
"On State Property", depending on the proportion of  State's shares/right of participation, JSCs and 
LLPs with State participation were divided into two categories:  (i) State-controlled JSCs and LLPs, 
in the charter capital of which the State owned controlling portfolio of shares (right of participation), i.e., more than 50% of the voting shares (right of participation); and, (ii) JSCs and 
LLPs with non-dominant shares of participation of the State.  
108.  The representative of Kazakhstan further added that according to Law "On State Property", 
State-controlled JSCs could be established in the following forms:  (i) national managing holding; 
(ii) national holding; (iii) national company; and, (iv) JSCs under the government agencies.  
109.  A national managing holding was a JSC, the founder and sole shareholder of which was the 
Government.  National managing holdings were established for effective management of shares 
                                               
5 In cases of bankruptcy resulted from actions of fo under, authorized state body  or local executive body, 
and insufficiency of financial resources in cases of liquidation.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 28 - 
 
  (right of participation in charter capital) of national development institutions, national companies 
and other juridical persons.  There were three national managing holdings in Kazakhstan:  National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", National Managing Holding "KazAgro" and National Managing Holding "Bayterek".  
110.  A national holding was a JSC, the founder and sole shareholder of which was the 
Government, established for effective management of shares of national companies and other JSCs, and rights of participation in the charter capital of LLPs.  There were two national holdings in 
Kazakhstan:   National Info-Communication Holding "Zerde" and National Scientific-Technological 
Holding "Parasat"
6. 
111.  A national company was a JSC, established by a decision of the Government or local 
executive bodies, controlling portfolio of shares of which belonged to the State, a national 
managing holding or a national holding, which operated in the spheres that formed the core of the 
national economy, or established for promot ing development of the economy of regions 
(socio-entrepreneurial corporations).  The national companies, controlling shares (50% and more) 
of which belonged to national managing holdings and national holdings, were not considered to be 
State-controlled JSCs as defined in Kazakhstan's law.  The national companies, controlling shares of which did not belong to national managing holdings or national holdings, but managed by the 
government agencies, were considered as State-controlled.  
112.  With respect to national managing holdings, national holdings, and national companies
7 
and other State-controlled JSCs and LLPs, the Go vernment exercised the following competences 
(Article 11 of Law "On State Property"):  
- took decisions on the establishment, reorganiza tion, change of the title and liquidation of a 
company; 
- determined the procedure for elaboration,  approval, monitoring and evaluation of 
development strategies and plans; and 
- determined the procedure for reporting on im plementation of development strategies and 
plans.  
113.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan applied local content 
requirements, in the form of preferences for purcha se of locally produced goods, with the objective 
to diversify the national economy.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation, local content requirements applied in procurement of goods and services
8 by JSC National Welfare Fund 
"Samruk-Kazyna"; JSC National Managing Holding "KazAgro"9; JSC National Info-Communication 
Holding "Zerde"; JSC National Scientific and Technological Holding "Parasat"; national companies that did not belong to national managing holdings or national holdings listed above; and in 
procurement by other JSCs and LLPs with 50% or more of State participation and State-owned 
enterprises (referred to in Section "Government Procurement" of this Report). 
114.  In reply to a question, the representative of Kazakhstan also clarified that National 
Managing Holding "KazAgro", National Info -Communication Holding "Zerde", National 
Scientific-Technological Holding "Parasat" and State-controlled national companies conducted procurement of goods and services in accordan ce with their own Procurement Rules, which 
stipulated local content requirements by application of conditional price discounts in total of up to 
20% for locally produced goods and services in tender procurements.  These Procurement Rules 
had been elaborated on the basis of the Mode l Procurement Rules approved by Government 
Resolution No. 787 of 28 May 2009.  
                                               
6 "National Medical Holding" had been removed from the list of nati onal holdings by Government 
Resolution No. 336 of 11 April 2013, and had been transferred to the autonomous educational organization "Nazarbayev University".   
7 Except for the national companies which belonged  to national managing holdings "Samruk-Kazyna" 
and "KazAgro", and national hold ings "Zerde" and "Parasat". 
8 The term "services" includes both services and wo rk as those terms are used in Law No. 291-IV "On 
Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010. 
9 JSC National Managing Holding "Bayterek" ha d been established on 22 May 2013.  The legal 
framework for functioning of the holdin g, including Procurement rules, was planned for adoption by the end of 
2013. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 29 - 
 
  115.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, Article 177 of Law "On State Property" and 
Article 13 of Law "On Joint Stock Companies" provided for the possibility of introduction of a golden share by the decision of the shareholde rs.  The golden share could be owned by the 
Government or by a private shareholder.  At pres ent, the Government did not own any such share.  
She further clarified that a "golden share" did not participate in the formation of the charter capital 
and earned no dividends.  The owner of a "gol den share" had the veto right with regard to 
decisions of the general shareholder meetings, th e Board of Directors and the executive body on 
the issues, determined by the Charter of the company.  The veto right was non-transferrable. 
116.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that the Government's role in the decision 
making process and activities of State enterprises, as well as JSCs/LLPs with State participation was strictly defined by the legislation of the Re public of Kazakhstan.  The Constitution of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan stipulated equal protection  of both private and St ate property and ensured 
that the principle of non-discrimination would be  observed regarding the treatment of companies 
and enterprises of different forms of property rights.  The Constitution also provided for the 
regulation and restriction of monopolistic activity.  In her view, this was a sound guarantee that 
State enterprises and JSCs/LLPs with State participation would not act in a manner that would distort the competitive environment.   
117.  In response, a Member noted that the Governme nt owned 100% of the shares of national 
managing holdings and national holdings, and thus exercised control of both the national managing holdings and national holdings, and any JSCs in which the national managing holdings and national holdings owned 50% or more of the shares.  Thus, each of the forms of JSCs 
described in paragraph 108 as well as those national companies where the Government or a 
national managing holding, or a national holdin g owned 50% or more of the shares were subject 
to the provisions of paragraph 142. 
118.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan presented statistical data on the participation 
of State enterprises in the economy (Annex 3(G) of this Report), which demonstrated that the share of State property, including State en terprises, in the total Gross Value Added
10 accounted for 
9.6% in 2011.  In particular, the share of St ate property, including State enterprises, in 
agriculture, forestry and fishery in 2011 accounted for 6.8% of the Gross Value Added.  The share 
of services produced by State enterprises in 2011 accounted for 14.8% in Gross Value Added (see Annex 3(H) of this Report).   
119.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to enumerate all enterprises that were State-owned or 
controlled and all enterprises that enjoyed special privileges, based on an agreed standard, in respect to Kazakhstan's energy sector, and to provide detailed descriptions of all such enterprises 
in the energy sector.  This Member also requested Kazakhstan to provide a more detailed 
description of "KazMunaiGaz" and the so-called "natural monopolies" that operated pipelines.  
120.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that there were no enterprises with special 
privileges in the energy sector of Kazakhstan with in the meaning of Article XVII of the GATT 1994.  
For example, National Company "KazMunaiGaz" accounted for 11% of the total production of the oil and gas sector (according to data in 2010).  "KazMunaiGaz" was engaged in the extraction, 
transportation and processing of oil and natural gas.  The company's main activities included 
exploration and survey work, development of oil, gas and gas condensate deposits; production and 
transportation of oil and natural gas; primary processing of oil and gas; and sales of hydrocarbons and processed products.  In the oil transportation sector, JSC "KazTransOil", a subsidiary of 
"KazMunaiGaz", operated the Uzen – Atyrau (K azakhstan) – Samara (Russia) oil pipeline.  
This part of the activity was regulated by the Committee on Regulation of Natural Monopolies and 
Protection of Competition of the Ministry of National Economy.  With respect to gas transportation, 
the principal transporter of natural gas by main -line pipelines was "Intergas Central Asia", a 
subsidiary of "KazMunaiGaz".  It provided domestic transportation, international transit and export transportation services.  Tariffs for transportation services rendered to domestic consumers were regulated by the Committee on Regulation of Natura l Monopolies and Protection of Competition of 
                                               
10 Gross Value Added is the difference between output  of goods and services (e.g., sales revenue) and 
intermediary consumption (e.g., cost of goods and servic es used in production).  Gross Value Added does not 
include net taxes, which are included  into the Gross Domestic Product. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 30 - 
 
  the Ministry of National Economy.  Tariffs for expo rt routes and transit of natural gas by pipelines 
were not subject to State regulation.   
121.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that a number of companies with 50% or 
more of State participation in equity had been included in the portfolio of National Welfare Fund 
"Samruk-Kazyna", a national managing holding, established in the form of the JSC with 100% 
participation of the State.  The Fund had been established with the objective to improve corporate governance in national companies and enhance the competitiveness of the national economy.  
Independent ownership also allowed companies to operate more as commercial entities and 
generate their own profits.  The sole founder an d shareholder of the Fund was the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, which managed the Fund exclusively through fulfilling the competences of the shareholder and through represen tation in the Board of Directors.  The Prime 
Minister of Kazakhstan ex officio  chaired the Board of Directors.  The Fund interacted with its 
companies through exercising functions of the shareh older and its representation in their Boards of 
Directors. 
122.  In reply to the request of a Member for further clarifications on the role of the 
Government, the representative of Kazakhstan stat ed that according to Article 7 of Law No. 550-IV 
"On the National Welfare Fund" of 1 February 2012 (hereinafter: Law "On the National Welfare 
Fund"), exclusive competences of the Government, as the sole shareholder of National Welfare 
Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", were stipulated as the following:  
1) Approval and introduction of amendments  and addenda to the Charter of the Fund; 
2) Approval of the Annual Financial Statement of the Fund; 
3) Approval of the Development Strate gy of the Fund and introduction of 
amendments and addenda to the Strategy; 
4) Decision making on voluntary reorganization and liquidation of the Fund; 
5) Decision making on increase of number of authorized shares of the Fund or 
changing the type of unallocated authorized shares of the Fund; 
6) Determination of the term of office of the Board of Directors of the Fund, election 
of its members and early termination of their office;  
7) Sales of shares of the daughter companie s, determined by the sole shareholder of 
the Fund, and transfer of these shares into trust management; 
8) Decision making on liquidation and reorganization of daughter companies, 
determined by the sole shareholder of the Fund; 
9) Appointment and early termination of office of the Chairman of the Board; 
10) Distribution of net income for the reporting financial year, payment of dividends on 
ordinary shares and approval of the amount  of dividends per one ordinary share of 
the Fund; 
11) Decision making on non-payment of dividends on ordinary shares in cases, 
stipulated by Law "On Joint Stock Companies"; 
12) Approval of the dividend Policy of the Fund; 13) Approval of the decision of the Board of Directors of the Fund, on the price, quality 
and structure of placement of shares of companies within the Fund, offered on the 
stock market for the purposes of implemen ting a decision of the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan;    
14) Decision making on the purchase and sales of shares of banks and transfer thereof 
to trust management; 
15) Approval and introduction of amendments  into the Code of Corporate Governance; 
and, 
16) Other issues according to Law "On the National Welfare Fund" and/or Charter of 
the Fund.  
123.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  the selection of the Board of Directors was 
performed on the basis of Law "On Joint Stock Companies" and Law "On the National Welfare 
Fund".  In accordance with Article 35 of Law "On Joint Stock Companies", the Government, as a 
single shareholder, had the exclusive competence to select members of the Board of Directors.  Pursuant to Article 8 of Law "On the National Welfare Fund", the Board of Directors consisted of 
the Chairperson and members elected by the single shareholder.  The Board of Directors was 
formed from the Cabinet members, CEO, independen t Directors and other persons.  The number of 
Directors was defined by the Charter of the Fu nd, provided that the number of independent 
Directors was not less than two-fifths of the total number of the Board of Directors. The criteria WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 31 - 
 
  and procedure for selecting independent Directors were set in Article 1 of Law "On Joint Stock 
Companies" and the Rules for the Election of Independent Directors.  In particular, independent Directors could not (be): 
- affiliated with the given JSC, nor affiliated  with the affiliated persons of the given JSC 
 within the last three years prior to election; 
- in subordination with an executive of the given JSC or organizations - affiliated persons of  the given JSC within the last three years prior to election; 
- a civil servant; 
- a representative of the shareholder at the meetings of the bodies of the given JSC within  the last three years prior to election; and - have participated as an auditor in auditing of the given JSC within the last three years 
 prior to election. 
124.  Strategic decisions of the Fund's companies we re made from the perspective of increasing 
their long-term value and effective management of assets.  The Government did not interfere in 
the day-to-day activities of the Fund.  The Government was not accountable for liabilities of 
companies under National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", and was not authorized to dispose of their property.  The companies under "Samruk-Ka zyna" were neither "State enterprises", nor 
companies with State participation, since their shareholder was National Welfare Fund "Samruk-
Kazyna", and not the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
125.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that , based on data provided by the Statistics 
Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan, "Samruk- Kazyna" accounted for 7.2% of Kazakhstan's GDP 
in 2011 and 5.3% in 2012.  According to the Statis tics Agency of Kazakhstan, the share in GDP of 
other national managing holdings, national holdings and their entities in total constituted less than 0.5%.  A Member noted that, in contrast, in October 2013, Fitch Ratings had noted "Samruk-
Kazyna"'s 100% State ownership and its strategic significance to Kazakhstan's economy, and 
stated that the consolidated assets of "Samruk-Kazyna" and its 405 subsidiaries were equivalent to 50% of the country's GDP.  Fitch added that its investment accounted for 7-10% of GDP per year, 
and that 27% of Kazakhstan's total tax revenues and 6% of its total employment were also 
accounted for by this national holding company.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that methodologically, consolidated assets  of "Samruk-Kazyna" could not be compared to 
the GDP of Kazakhstan because the GDP represente d the total value of final goods and services 
produced within a country during a specified time pe riod.  In 2012, more than half of the GDP, i.e., 
52.5%, was accounted for by services, while production of goods constituted 41.4%.  In the services sector, "Samruk-Kazyna"'s subsidiaries engaged mainly in transportation and 
communication services.  The share of transporta tion and warehousing services constituted 7.5% 
of GDP, while the share of information and comm unication services constituted 2.6% of GDP.  
Companies providing services in both sectors were operating in a competitive environment along 
with other private companies.  The share of oil and gas production in GDP was 14.7%.  
In accordance with data from the Statistics Agency, the share of "Samruk-Kazyna"'s oil and gas producing subsidiary "KazMunaiGaz" in GDP in 2012 was 2.24%.  
126.  In reply to the question of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
privatization of national companies, national holdings, national managing holdings and the 
companies they held was conducted by the means of alienation of shares of the above-mentioned companies.  The legal basis for alienation of shares of such companies was Law "On the Joint 
Stock Companies".  Pursuant to paragraph 2.15 of Article 53 of this Law, the decision on alienation 
of 10% or more shares of the daughter and a ffiliated companies of National Welfare Fund 
"Samruk-Kazyna" was under the competence of the Board of Directors of the Fund.  Pursuant to 
Government Resolution No. 280 "On Approval of Complex Plan of Privatization for 2014-2016" of 
31 March 2014, as amended on 30 April 2014, the Government recommended to national holdings, national managing holdings and national companies to approve the list of daughter and affiliated companies subject to transfer into co mpetitive environment.  There were 106 companies 
of National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" subject to alienation primarily by means of bidding and 
four companies were subject to "Halyk IPO" proc edure. At the moment, one of "Samruk-Kazyna"'s 
companies, "KazTransOil", had been listed for partial privatization in the form of Halyk (People's) 
IPO, i.e., offering 10% (minus one share) for private purchase in December 2012.  More recently, 
"Samruk-Kazyna" announced plans for a similar 10% (minus one share) public listing of the Kazakhstan Electricity Grid Operating Company ("KEGOC") for November 2014.  Other partial 
public listings (i.e., under 10% of shar es) of "Samruk Energy", "KazAtomProm" and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 32 - 
 
  "KazTemirZholy" were contemplated later in the decade.  The companies subject to privatization 
operated in the spheres of oil and gas, transp ortation, energy, telecommunication, services and 
education.   
127.  The majority of the Fund's portfolio consisting of key national companies operating in oil 
extraction, telecommunication, mining, railway, electric power transmission and the defence 
industry, included:  "KazMunaiGaz", "Kazakht elecom", "Kazakhstan Temir Zholy", "KEGOC" 
"Kazpost", "Samruk-Energo", National At omic Company "Kazatomprom", "Kazakhstan 
Engineering", "Air Astana" and "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia"11.  Other holdings of "Samruk-Kazyna" 
were represented by companies operating in the financial sector, transportation and the chemical industry.  For the most part, the "Samruk-Kazyna" companies were classified as "strategic objects" as they operated assets indicated in paragraph 98.  Services provided by national companies in 
the spheres classified as natural monopolies were regulated in accordance with Law No. 272-I "On 
Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998 (for more detailed information see 
Section  "Pricing Policies" of this Working Party Report).   
128.  National Company "Kazakhtelecom" was an operator of fixed-line telephony services, 
which rendered traffic transit services providing connection between operating networks of countries bordering Kazakhstan.  National Company "Kazpost" rendered public postal services, 
including delivery, distribution and mailing of pe riodicals, cash transactions in settlements, and 
mailing of registered letters within the geographical boundaries of Kazakhstan.  National Company "Kazakhstan Temir Zholy" rendered main railway network services, cargo transportation services in domestic and import-export routes, and passenger transportation services.   National Company 
"KEGOC" rendered electric power transmission services via the national electricity grid, technical 
traffic control services, regulation and reservation of electric power, and management of electric power production-consumption balance.  
129.  JSC "Samruk-Energo" operated in the following spheres: production of electric and heating 
energy; transmission and distribution of elec tric energy; coal mining; and reconstruction, 
extension and construction of energy-related faci lities.   National Atomic Company "KazAtomProm" 
was engaged in the following activities:  geological exploration; uranium extraction; production of 
nuclear fuel cycle products; construction of reactors and nuclear power plants; nonferrous metals industry; and building of construction materials.    National Company "Kazakhstan Engineering" 
was a holding company managing enterprises related to production of goods and services for 
national defence and law enforcement purposes.  JSC "Air Astana" was an airline company, which 
rendered air transportation services in international and local directions.   LLP "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia" was the single distributor of pharmaceuticals within the framework of the 
Government's programme providing guaranteed  free medical treatment to the population. 
130.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that in 2011, Government Resolution No. 1027 of 
8 September 2011 approved the "Programme on Sa les of Shares of Daughter and Affiliated 
Companies of National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna " on the Stock Market", i.e., the "Halyk IPO".  
Subsequently, "Samruk-Kazyna" approved the progra mme on the sales of minority shares of the 
JSC "KazTransOil" on the stock market.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to provide a description of "KazTransOil", information on percentage of shares authorized for sales and on quantity of 
shares that had been sold, and implications of the sales in terms of management control.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that JSC "KazTransOil" was a subsidiary of National Company "KazMunaiGaz", which transported crude oil and oil products through the main pipelines.  
The shares of "KazTransOil" were offered to the citizens of Kazakhstan and pension funds of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  The citizens of Kazakhstan owning the shares would be able to participate in the management of the company by voting in the general shareholder meetings, and would be 
entitled to receive dividends paid from the net income of the company.  Overall, 10% minus one 
share of the authorized common shares of "KazTr ansOil" had been placed on the stock market, 
and approximately 80% of these shares had b een sold to more than 34,000 citizens of 
Kazakhstan.   
131.  "Samruk-Kazyna" managed its subsidiaries in accordance with Law "On Joint Stock 
Companies".  Procurement of goods and services by  the Fund and organizations in which the Fund 
                                               
11 "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia" was transferred to State ownership by Government Resolution No. 516 
of 25 May 2013. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 33 - 
 
  directly or indirectly owned 50% or more of the voting shares (right of participation), was 
conducted in accordance with the Procurement Rule s, approved by the Board of Directors of the 
Fund on 26 May 2012.  In reply to a Member's question as to whether the requirement for local content in procurement for "Samruk-Kazyna" was initiated with the May 2012 Procurement Rules, 
the representative of Kazakhstan explained that initially the local content requirements had been 
introduced by the Procurement Rules approved by  the Decision of the Board of Directors of 
18 November 2009 in accordance with the previous Law "On the National Welfare Fund".  
The currently applied Procurement Rules were appr oved in accordance with the new Law "On the 
National Welfare Fund".  Local content provisions had been introduced into the Procurement Rules of National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" in 2009, as part of the Government efforts to overcome negative impact of the global financial crisis of 2008-2009 in the economic growth of the 
country.  In particular, the local content provisions were aimed at stabilization of the social and 
economic situations in 27 single industry towns of Kazakhstan and maintaining jobs in the enterprises, including small and medium-sized businesses, which formed the core business 
activities of these towns.  The Procurement Rules did not apply to companies, in which the Fund's 
share ownership (right of participation) was less than 50%.  Tender was the main method applied for the procurement of goods and services.  The Procurement Rules stipulated criteria for the 
evaluation of bids and provided for the application of conditional price discount in total of up to 
20% for locally produced goods and services.  
132.  Asked to describe the structure of the local content requirements in procurement contracts 
in terms of scope and duration, the representati ve of Kazakhstan stated that the procurement 
contracts, concluded by "Samruk-Kazyna" and its companies, had to contain the local content 
provisions, which were indicated by a supplier in his/her tender offer or price quotation.  "Samruk-Kazyna" and its companies signed a contract with a supplier who accepted the lowest conditional 
price, as a result of application of conditional price discounts, provided that the technical 
requirements of tender documentation had been met.  Thus, there were several factors affecting tender results, such as conformity with technical requirements, proposed price for goods and 
services, and the share of local content in goods or services. 
133.  A Member requested to clarify which firms were engaged in commercial activities and 
distinguish them from those that were conducting business for the Government.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that al l "Samruk-Kazyna" subsidiaries were engaged in 
commercial activities, except for JSC "Kazakhsta n Engineering".  JSC "Kazakhstan Engineering", 
along with machinery construction products and engineering services in commercial sphere, produced goods for national defence purposes .  LLP "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia" conducted 
procurement of pharmaceuticals, medical equipm ent and materials which were distributed to 
public hospitals and polyclinics for provision of guaranteed free medical treatment to the population by the State.  She noted that, at the same time, pursuant to Government Resolution 
No. 516 of 25 May 2013, 100% portfolio of right of participation in LLP "Samruk-Kazyna 
Pharmacia" had been transferred to the State ownership from National Welfare Fund "Samruk-
Kazyna".   
134.  Some Members noted that in practical, if not in legal, terms, many of the enterprises in 
Kazakhstan appeared to enjoy exclusive or spec ial privileges.  These Members of the Working 
Party requested Kazakhstan to submit a draft notification prepared in conformity with the provisions of Article XVII of the GATT 1994 and sought a strong commitment from Kazakhstan that 
State enterprises, including JSCs/LLPs with State participation, engaged in commercial activities 
operated in compliance with WTO provisions, including on a commercial basis.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan had acknowledged the existence of about 6,000 State-owned enterprises and 
JSCs and LLPs with State participation in their ownership, which included a number of 
State-controlled enterprises, some of them involved in import/export operations, and enquired whether a number of these enterprises, including JSCs and LLPs with State participation, would qualify as State-trading enterprises under the criteria set out in Article XVII of the GATT 1994, 
whether or not "funded by the national budget" or  operating as monopolies.  This Member pointed 
out that the substantive provisions of Arti cle XVII of the GATT 1994 were applicable to 
State-controlled enterprises, such as JSCs and LLPs with State participation in their ownership 
even without special or exclusive privileges that made them eligible for notification, and that the 
obligations of these provisions also applied to all purchases and sales "involving either import or export".  This Member requested Kazakhstan to submit a revised notification on State-trading 
enterprises. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 34 - 
 
  135.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that there were only three companies, 
subsidiaries of National Managing Holding "KazAgro", that were involved in import and export operations with the use of budget funding: National Company "Food Contract Corporation", JSC "KazAgroProduct" (formerly known as "Mal Onimde ri Korporatsiyasy") and JSC "KazAgroFinance".  
However, the representative of Kazakhstan asserted that these enterprises did not fall under 
notification obligations of the Understanding on Article XVII of the GATT 1994 as they enjoyed neither exclusive, nor special rights with respect to the importation or exportation of goods.   
136.  National Company "Food Contract Corporation" had been established to ensure the 
country's food security by maintaining and renewing the State grain reserves through the State grain resources.  "Food Contract Corporation", as an agent of the Government, had the exclusive right to implement the budget programme on proc urement, storage and transportation of State 
grain resources (comprising of State grain reserves and realization resources), as well as the 
stocks for market interventions.  The Governme nt approved the rules governing purchases for 
State grain resources and annually established the volumes and prices for such purchases.  
The Government had the right to use State resources as food aid to foreign countries through 
"Food Contract Corporation".  "Food Contract Corp oration" conducted its foreign trade operations 
in competition with private traders and subject to  market prices.  The total share of procurement 
of "Food Contract Corporation" constituted 16.8% of the total volume of grain produced in 
Kazakhstan.  In response to the question of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the local content requirements were stipul ated in the Rules on Procurement of Goods and 
Services of "Food Contract Corporation" approved by the Decision of the Board of Directors of 
24 November 2009.  In particular, paragraph 30 of the Rules provided for conditional price 
discounts of up to 20% for domestically produced goods and services in procurements conducted via tender.   
137.  JSC "KazAgroProduct" had been established in 2001 with the objective to support domestic 
producers of livestock products.  The company was engaged in: (i) procurement, storage, processing and the sale of livestock, raw materials and livestock products in the domestic market 
and for export; (ii) importation of agricultural and livestock products for further processing and 
sale; and, (iii) purchase (including importation) of specialized transport, technological equipment for processing and storage of agricultural and livestock products for the company's needs or for sale.  The company conducted import and export operations alongside private companies in a 
competitive environment and its share was less than 1% of the total volume of meat produced in 
Kazakhstan.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that "KazAgroProduct" conducted its procurement of goods and services in accordance with the 
Procurement Rules approved by the Decision of the Board of Directors of 18 April 2011.  
The Procurement Rules provided for application of a conditional price discount in total of up to 20% for locally produced goods and services in procurements conducted via tender, which was a 
mandatory method for procurements exceeding 4,000 monthly calculation index
12.  She further 
added that since 2007 there were no purchases of specialized transport and technological equipment for processing and storing of agricultural  and livestock products.  Therefore, there were 
no local content requirements applied for those particular types of purchases. 
138.  JSC "KazAgroFinance" was established to implement the State policy aimed at creating a 
competitive agricultural sector through rendering financial services and provision of agricultural machinery and equipment under financial leasing schemes.  "KazAgroFinance" purchased 
agricultural machinery in the domestic and international markets for subsequent leasing to 
farmers.  In the sphere of foreign economic acti vity, "KazAgroFinance" was engaged in importation 
of agricultural machinery, equipment, and animals, and had no monopoly or any other exclusive 
rights or privileges in this sphere.  The Government did not regulate the prices, the volume or the 
types of agricultural machinery or equipment purc hased by the company.  All such decisions were 
made by "KazAgroFinance" in accordance with available financial resources and based on applications from agricultural producers with the specification of the type of machinery they 
planned to lease from "KazAgroFinance".  The Gove rnment determined only the interest rates in 
leasing schemes and other financial support programmes of "KazAgroFinance" funded from the State budget, and did not regulate the interest rates for its financing activities funded from other 
sources.  In reply to a question, the representati ve of Kazakhstan explained that "KazAgroFinance" 
                                               
12 One monthly calculation index (MCI) is equal to KZT 1,852 in 2014.  4,000 MCIs are equal to around 
US$40,500 in 2014. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 35 - 
 
  conducted its procurement of goods and services in accordance with the Procurement Rules 
approved by the Decision of the Board of Di rectors of 4 April 2011.  The Procurement Rules 
provided for application of a conditional price discount in total of up to 20% for locally produced goods and services in procurements conducted via tender.  However, procurement of agricultural 
machinery and equipment for subsequent leasing to agricultural producers was conducted based 
on applications from farmers.  Therefore, conditional price discounts foreseen for procurements via tender were not applied to the purchases of agri cultural machinery and equipment for subsequent 
leasing to agricultural producers.  She added that according to the data prov ided by the Ministry of 
Investments and Development, in her view, the share of local content in the procurement of 
"KazAgroProduct" and "KazAgroFinance" was insignificant.  For instance, in 2012 "KazAgroProduct" purchased goods for the amount of KZT 24.5 million, of which local content composed around 
KZT 2.5 million or 10%.  In 2012, "KazAgroFinance" purchased goods for the amount of KZT 48.6 
billion, of which local content constituted only KZT 2 billion or 4.2%. 
139.  With the objective to facilitate the growth and diversification of the economy, attract 
investments and develop clusters through optimization of the management system of development 
institutions and financial organizations, National Managing Holding "Bayterek" had been established by Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 571 of 22 May 2013.  
The following subsidiaries of National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" had been transferred to 
"Bayterek":  JSC "Development Bank of Kazakh stan", JSC "Kazyna Capital Management", JSC 
Export-Credit Insurance Corporation "KazExportGa rant", JSC "Investment Fund of Kazakhstan", 
JSC Entrepreneurship Development Fund "Damu".  The portfolio of "Bayterek" also included a 
number of JSCs previously supervised by governme nt agencies, such as:  JSC "National Agency on 
Technological Development" (formerly under the au spices of the Ministry of Industry and New 
Technologies);  JSC "Zhilstroysberbank of Kazakh stan", JSC Mortgage Organization "Kazakhstan's 
Mortgage Company", JSC "Kazakhstan's Fund on Guaranteeing Mortgage Loans" (formerly under 
the auspices of the Ministry of Regional De velopment); and, JSC "Distressed Assets Fund" 
(formerly under the auspices of the Mini stry of Economy and Budget Planning). 
140.  In reply to the question from a Member regarding the establishment of State monopolies in 
the field of importation or exportation of goods, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that currently Kazakhstan did not maintain nor envisage the establishment of State monopolies for importation or exportation of goods, except for exports of sturgeon roe and other sturgeon 
products.  According to Article 11-1 of Law No. 593-II "On Protection, Reproduction and Use of 
Fauna" of 9 July 2004, exports of sturgeon roe and ot her sturgeon products, as well as the activity 
for catching  Acipenseridae  fish species and their procurement and processing, were  referred to 
the sphere of State monopolies.  In 2011, the Government had established the state monopoly, 
Ural-Atyrau Sturgeon Fishing Plant.  Kazakhstan wa s planning to notify the enterprise as provided 
for in the Understanding on Article XVII of the GATT 1994.  
141.  In response to the request from a Member, th e representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
the local content requirements in the form of 20% conditional price discount were applied in procurements of national managing holdings, national holdings and national companies, as well as other JSCs and LLPs with 50% or more of State part icipation.  In response to the question from a 
Member, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the entities described from paragraph 109 
to paragraph 114 above and paragraph 937 of Sectio n "Government Procurement" of this Report 
were the only entities in Kazakhstan, other th an those described in Section "Trade Related 
Investment Measures" of this Report, that must comply with the local content provisions when 
seeking to purchase goods, services or works.  Currently the following State-controlled companies existed in Kazakhstan:   
- three national managing holdings ("Samruk-Kazyna",  "KazAgro" and "Bayterek");  
- two national holdings ("Zerde" and "Parasat");  - 33 national companies (including 10 under the national managing holdings); and - 944 JSCs and LLPs managed by the government agencies. 
142.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan had State-owned and 
State-controlled enterprises that operated in the commercial sphere, including national companies, 
national managing holdings, national holdings and any JSCs in which the national managing 
holdings and national holdings owned 50% or more of the shares.   She further confirmed that 
from the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO, such enterprises, when engaged in 
commercial activity, would make purchases, which were not intended for governmental use, and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 36 - 
 
  sales in international trade in a manner consistent with applicable provisions of the 
WTO Agreement.  She confirmed in particular, that such enterprises would make such purchases and sales in accordance with commercial considerations, including price, quality, availability, marketability, and transportation, and would affo rd enterprises of other WTO Members adequate 
opportunity in conformity with customary business practice, to compete for participation in such 
purchases or sales.  She also confirmed that within the scope of the services commitments of Kazakhstan, including the limitations, set-out in its WTO Schedule of Specific Commitments on 
Trade in Services, the rights and obligations of  Kazakhstan under the WTO General Agreement on 
Trade in Services, and the regulatory measures of Kazakhstan covered by the WTO Agreement, 
including pricing regulations, and without prejudice to such commitments, rights, obligations, and measures that are consistent with these commitments, rights and obligations, Kazakhstan would 
ensure that such enterprises would act in accordance with the provisions set-out in this paragraph.  
She further confirmed that these commitments were without prejudice to the transition period for investment contracts concluded under Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 
24 June 2010 set-out in paragraphs 896 and 897 and to Kazakhstan's participation in negotiations 
on joining the WTO Agreement on Government Procur ement or its offer on covered entities in such 
negotiations.  She also confirmed that, upon accession, Kazakhstan would notify enterprises falling 
within the scope of the Understanding on Article XVII of the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs 
and Trade 1994.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Pricing Policies 143.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal basis for the policy of regulation of 
natural monopolies within the EAEU was Section XIX "Natural Monopolies" (Article 78) and Annex 
No. 20 "Protocol on Common Principles and Rules of Regulation of the Activity of Natural Monopolies" of the EAEU Treaty.  These prov isions replaced the CU Agreement on Common 
Principles and Rules of Regulation of Activity of Natural Monopolies of 9 December 2010, which 
was terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into  effect on 1 January 2015.  From 1 January 2015, 
Section XIX and Annex No. 20 of the EAEU Treaty provided for basic principles and rules of 
r e g u l a t i o n  o f  a c t i v i t i e s  o f  n a t u r a l  m o n o p o l i e s .   T h e  E A E U  T r e a t y  a i m e d  a t  e n s u r i n g  b a l a n c e  o f  
interests of consumers and natural monopolies, ef fectiveness of functioning and development of 
natural monopolies, and harmonization of national legislations in this sphere.  In particular, Annex No. 20 to the EAEU Treaty provided for non-discriminatory access to services rendered by natural 
monopolies of an EAEU member State to consumers from the other EAEU member States provided 
technical capacities were duly available.  Regu lation of tariffs was based on the principle of 
separate accounting of costs related to services pr ovided by natural monopolies.  When regulating 
tariffs, the following criteria were taken into account: (i) recovery of economically justified costs 
related to regulated activities; (ii) earning of economically justified profits; (iii) promotion of cost effectiveness; and, (iv) formation of tariffs taking into account reliability and quality of services 
rendered by natural monopolies. 
144.  Pursuant to Chapter VII of Annex No. 19 "Pro tocol on Common Principles and Rules of 
Competition" to the EAEU Treaty, price regulation  could be introduced on the goods markets which 
were not in the state of natural monopoly in exceptional cases, which included, inter alia , 
emergency situations and natural calamities, national security interests, and for particular types of 
socially important products. 
145.  The Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter: Commission or EEC) upon request of an 
EAEU member State could adopt a decision on necessity of repealing the regulated price.  
The Commission's decision was implemented in accordance with the national legislation of a member State.  However, this competence did not extend to the  services sector, natural 
monopolies, state procurement and interventions, and the following goods: (i) natural gas; (ii) 
liquefied gas for household needs; (iii) electric and heating energy; (iv) vodka, liquor and other alcohol products with strength above 28% (minimum price); (v) ethyl spirits from food raw material (minimum price); (vi) solid and heating fuel; (vii) production of nuclear energy cycle; 
(viii) kerosene for household needs; (ix) oil products; (x) pharmaceuticals; and, (xi) tobacco 
products. 
146.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and 
Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998 (hereinafter: Law "On Natural Monopolies") had established the 
legal framework for State regulation in the sphere of natural monopolies and regulated markets, including price setting by natural monopolies and regulated market participants.  Law "On Natural WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 37 - 
 
  Monopolies" was aimed at protecting the interests of consumers, natural monopolies and regulated 
markets, as well as balancing consumer interests vis-à-vis  the interests of natural monopolies.  
A natural monopoly was deemed to exist in a market in which creation of a competitive environment for the provision of a particular type of services / goods / works was not possible or 
economically viable, due to the technological characteristics of the production process and supply 
of services / goods / works.  State regulation was implemented through establishing: (i) tariff 
rates / prices / fee rates; (ii) tariff estimates; (iii) temporary compensatory tariffs; (iv) temporary 
decreasing coefficients; (v) special order for cost formation; (vi) separate calculation of revenue, 
expenditures and used assets for each type of regulated activities; and, (vii) coordination of 
accounting policies.  The coverage of Law "On Natural Monopolies" extended to both foreign and domestic juridical persons (their branches and representative offices), individual entrepreneurs, 
public bodies and natural persons in Kazakhstan.  The provisions of Law "On Natural Monopolies", 
however, did not extend to individual entreprene urs and juridical persons, engaged in activities 
classified as natural monopolies related to the construction and operation of facilities used for their 
own needs.  She added that by Order of the Ag ency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies No. 91-
OD of 19 March 2005 the "Rules on Increase or Decrease of Tariffs (Prices, Rates and Fees) or the Maximum Levels for Rendered Services (Goods, Wo rks) Subject to Regulation" (hereinafter: Rules 
on Tariffs) had been approved.  Pursuant to Law "On Natural Monopolies" and the Rules on Tariffs, 
the maximum level at which tariffs were set, as well as any tariff rate changes, had to cover the production cost of services rendered and take into account the profit margin required for effective operation.  In addition, many of these controls regulated the price of certain goods (e.g., energy) 
supplied to households and other non-commercial users, and were also based on domestic social 
policy considerations.  The list of services regulated by the State as natural monopolies is contained in Annex 4 of this Report.   
147.  A regulated market participant set a ceiling price for its goods / works / services based on 
production and marketing costs, as well as profit ma rgins.  The ceiling price had to be approved by 
the authorized body as being reasonable, based on the findings of a price appraisal.  A regulated 
market participant had the right to decrease and increase the price for produced / sold goods 
works / services within the ceiling price level.   
148.  She added that by Government Resolution No. 1005 of 30 September 2010 the 
"Programme on the Tariff Policy of the Republic  of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014" had been approved. 
The Programme was aimed at establishing an effective and balanced regulation system in the 
sphere of natural monopolies, which encouraged investments in modernization and technological 
upgrades, quality improvements and enhancemen t of competitiveness of the infrastructural 
sectors.  She added that the legislation did not prevent foreign and domestic enterprises from 
competing in sectors dominated by natural monopolies.  In response to a specific question, she confirmed that "natural monopoly" was a legal term.  
149.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that all natural monopolies were subject to a 
uniform set of requirements and applied prices / tariffs that were approved by the Committee on 
Regulation of Natural Monopolies and Protection of Competition of the Ministry of National Economy (hereinafter in this Section: Committee).  When considering applications, the Committee 
conducted a financial and, if necessary, technica l evaluations of the proposed increases while 
taking into account the operations of other similar enterprises.  The tariffs approved by the Committee had to cover costs required to provide the regulated services and take into account an 
adequate level of profits necessary to ensure th e company's efficient operation.  Based on the 
outcome of the review, the Committee developed a preliminary decision, which was discussed at public hearings (consultation process).  The Committee was required to hold public hearings when 
reviewing applications of natural monopolies for appr oval of tariffs ceiling levels.  Public hearings 
involved members of local executive branches , representatives from Government agencies, 
consumers and their public associations, independ ent experts, as well as the applicant (natural 
monopoly).  Relevant information (e.g., Committee decisions) was published regularly in the 
media and was available on http://www.kremzk.gov.kz/eng/.   Asked to provide the list of natural 
monopolies, she referred to the website: http://www.kremzk.gov.kz/eng/ menu2/registry/resp_razd/.  
150.  She further noted that the adoption of the "Measures on Improvement of the Tariff Policy 
for Natural Monopolies for the period 2008-2010", approved by Government Resolution No. 1279 
of 24 December 2007, had demonstrated the Government's effort to ensure the sustainable 
operation of natural monopolies.  Measures were aimed at improving the legal and regulatory WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 38 - 
 
  framework, and the methodology for establishing tariffs, including the introduction of 
forward-looking methods.   
151.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that th e production of electric power, natural gas 
and gas condensate, as well as other forms of energy, was not regulated as a natural monopoly.  
She added that Law No. 166-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts on 
Issues of Natural Monopolies" of 5 July 2006 had in troduced the concept of "strategic goods" that 
included:  coal, gas, mazut, diesel fuel, and electric power used by natural monopolies.  
The provisions of the Law required that a natural monopoly / consumer had to purchase those 
strategic goods directly from producers or dire ct importers, except in cases where supply 
shortages existed in a particular market.  This re quirement had been introduced as a result of the 
fact that the fuel cost had reached 70% of the expenses of natural monopolies due to the large 
number of intermediaries in the supply chain from producer to natural monopoly / consumer.  
In reply to a question, she noted that the term "strategic object" was not related to the term "strategic good".  The term "strategic object" wa s used for regulation of certain infrastructural 
assets important for protecting the national integrity of Kazakhstan's economy whereas the term  
"strategic good" was used for the purpose of  tariff regulation of natural monopolies. 
152.  In reply to the question from a Member re garding the regulation of energy prices, 
especially gas prices, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, according to Law No. 532-IV 
"On Gas and Gas Supply" of 9 January 2012, her Government had established maximum wholesale prices for commercial and liquefied petroleum gas on the domestic market, based on the proposal of the Ministry of Energy.  In accordance with Law "On Natural Monopolies", retail prices for gas 
charged by market participants with dominant or monopolistic position on the relevant market 
were regulated by the Committee.  Companies with dominant or monopolistic position had to submit to the Committee notification on the proposed price increases for gas, along with the 
relevant justification materials.  The proposed price was subject to the approval by the Committee 
based on the results of the price appraisal conducted in accordance with Article 7-2 of Law "On Natural Monopolies", which regulated price setting in regulated markets, as described in 
paragraph 147.  Retail prices for petroleum products were regulated in accordance with Law 
No. 463-IV "On State Regulation of Production and Turnover of Certain Types of Petroleum 
Products" of 20 July 2011.  The Committee in coordi nation with the Ministry of Energy approved 
maximum retail prices for petroleum products in accordance with the procedures established by 
Government Resolution No. 287 of 2 March 2012.  The list of regulated petroleum products was 
approved by Government Resolution No. 286 of 2 March 2012, which included the following types 
of oil products:  Ai-80, Ai 92 and Ai 93 gasoline brands, summer and inter-seasonal diesel fuel.  
These measures had been introduced in order to prevent unfair price increases on utility services 
provided to households and stabilize the situatio n on the domestic market of petroleum and gas 
products, in particular to curb high inflation in the country.  She added that the Government 
regulated prices of petroleum products and gas used  by households as part of social policy aimed 
at stabilization of retail prices for socially important products. 
153.  Asked whether the Government had an author ity to apply price controls on goods and 
whether such controls existed, the representative  of Kazakhstan replied that, in principle, in 
accordance with Article 9.7 of Constitutional La w No. 2688 "On the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 18 December 1995, the Government had the authority to develop and implement the State pricing policy, as well as to set the pr ices of goods and services.  At the moment, the 
Government set prices for the following goods:  (i) minimum retail prices for vodka, special vodka 
and other hard liquors (Law No. 429-I "On State Re gulation of Production and Turnover of Ethyl 
Spirits and Alcohol Products" of 16 July 1999 and Government Resolution No. 1592 "On 
Establishing Minimum Prices for Alcohol Products" of 23 October 1999, as amended in 
February 2011); (ii) minimum retail prices for filter cigarettes of length between 45mm and 85 mm, and of length between 87.1 mm and 160 mm (Law No. 439-II "On State Regulation of Production and Turnover of Tobacco Products" of 12 June 2003 and Government Resolution No. 
260 "On Establishing Minimum Retail Prices for Filter Cigarettes" of 4 April 2007); (iii) maximum 
retail prices for petroleum products (Law No. 463-IV "On State Regulation of Production and Turnover of Certain Types of Petroleum Products " of 20 July 2011); and (iv) maximum wholesale 
prices for liquefied petroleum gas on the domestic market (Law No. 532-IV "On Gas and Gas 
Supply" of 9 January 2012 and Government Resolution No. 1272 "On Establishing Maximum Wholesale Price for Liquefied Petroleum Gas on  the Internal Market" of 8 October 2012).  
Price setting applied only to internal sale, and had not been applied in a discriminatory manner WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 39 - 
 
  between domestically produced and imported products.  These measures were introduced as part 
of public health and social stability policies.   
154.  Concerning the provision of electric power supply services, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that by Government Resoluti on No. 190 of 18 February 2004 the "Concept of 
Further Development of Market Relations in the Electric Power Industry in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" had been approved.  She added that Law No. 588-II "On Power Industry" had been adopted on 9 July 2004.  In accordance with the provisions of this legislation, electric power supply 
services (on the retail market for electricity) had been transferred to the competitive market 
where electricity suppliers set tariffs for final consumers on the basis of market principles.  Power supply companies with a dominant (monopo listic) position had been registered at the 
Committee.  Other new developments included the use of centralized bidding for electric power 
procurement for sale to retail customers; the separation of heating networks from generation 
plants; and the creation of a level playing field fo r the supply of electric power with the purpose to 
promote competition between national-level electr ic power stations and regional producers of 
electric power.  Transmission and distribution of el ectricity by inter-regional networks (via National 
Company "KEGOC") was considered to be an activity within the sphere of natural monopolies, and therefore subject to State price regulation.  The methodology of setting tariffs for electric power 
transmission services had been amended to remove the direct dependence of tariffs rates on the 
distance of power transmission.  An energy deficiency and network capacity coefficient had instead been introduced.  She noted that the provisions of the new legislation allowed for an easy access to the wholesale market for electricity.   
155.  With regard to the regime governing natural gas, a Member enquired whether foreign 
companies in Kazakhstan benefited from the same prices as Kazakhstan's companies, and whether prices charged for domestic consumers were the same as for export.  In addition, this Member 
asked Kazakhstan to confirm that prices of energy products (notably oil and gas) in Kazakhstan 
covered at least all costs of extraction, producti on, transport and marketing of those products, an 
appropriate contribution to fixed costs and financing charges plus a reasonable profit margin, 
sufficient to remunerate current fixed and capital investments associated with those products and 
secure future ones, including maintenance and upgrade of infrastructure and in the exploration and development of new fields done or planned.   
156.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan sa id that, at present, her Government regulated 
the prices of gas, in particular the wholesale domestic prices for liquefied petroleum gas 
(as indicated in paragraphs 152 and  153), and retail domestic prices for petroleum products and 
retail prices for gas charged by market participants  with dominant or monopolistic position on the 
relevant market (as indicated in paragraph 152).  Except for these limitations, gas and crude oil 
produced in and exported from Kazakhstan were so ld at market-based prices.  Transportation of 
gas via pipelines for domestic consumption and crude oil via main pipelines was subject to 
regulation as natural monopolies.  The regulated tariffs for transportation of gas and oil were 
based on the "cost plus reasonable profit" principle.  Tariffs for transportation of gas for export via pipelines were not regulated by the Government.   
157.  With regard to the regime governing oil, some Members requested more information on 
the natural monopolies operating in the oil (and ga s) pipeline industry and on the procedures set 
by natural monopolies to access oil pipelines.  These Members enquired what criteria were used to provide access to pipelines and whether any form of guidance was provided by the Government 
with respect to the provision of access.   
158.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the procedure for providing consumers with 
equal access to regulated services / goods / works of natural monopolies was contained in 
the "Rules For Granting Equal Access to Regulated Services (Goods, Works) in Oil and/or Oil 
Products Transportation Via Main Pipelines" (Order of the Chairman of the Agency on Regulation of 
Natural Monopolies No. 107 of 19 January 2005).  At the moment, Kazakhstan's oil was exported via three pipelines:  (i) "Uzen–Atyrau (Kazakhs tan)–Samara (Russia)" owned by "KazTransOil"; 
(ii) "Tengiz-Novorossiysk" owned by the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC); and, 
(iii) "Kenkiyak-Alashangkou" owned by "Kazakhstan-China Pipeline".  The volume of oil exports via the "Uzen-Atyrau-Samara" pipeline was determined by its traffic capacity and was based on the 
annual inter-governmental agreement between the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 40 - 
 
  159.  The Ministry of Energy allocated available tran sportation quotas for exports of crude oil via 
the  "Uzen–Atyrau–Samara" pipeline among Kazakhstan's companies producing crude oil proportionally to the volume of their production depending on the available transport capacities of 
the main pipeline in Kazakhstan and transit ca pacity provided by the Russian Federation.  
Applications from the producers had to indicate the production volume and destination for the 
transportation of crude oil.  Once the quota volume was agreed, the exporter had to sign an Oil Transportation Agreement with the main pipeline operator – "KazTransOil".  In negotiations on the 
annual transit quotas with the Russian Federation, the Government of Kazakhstan took into 
account the forecasted needs for crude oil transportation of all Kazakhstan's companies.  To date, all requests for transportation of crude oil ha d been met and there had been no shortage of 
quotas.  Thus, quotas were allocated to both domestic and foreign invested companies producing 
crude oil in Kazakhstan on a non-discriminatory basis.   
160.  A Member asked if there was an official double  pricing policy in any sector and a double 
pricing regime in practice as a result of Govern ment measures.  In reply, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan's legislation did not provide for double pricing policy.  
Different tariffs charged for transportation of good s in different directions were explained by the 
differences in costs incurred by natural monopolies when rendering their services.  According to 
Law "On Natural Monopolies ", when establishing tariffs of natural monopolies, the Committee took 
into account all costs incurred by the entity and the reasonable profit, which could ensure efficient functioning of the operator.  
161.  Some Members noted that, although a priori  tariff rates for transport of oil by pipeline 
were the same for domestic consumption and export, the application of a decreasing (discount) 
coefficient for domestic consumption resulted in a higher de facto  rate for transportation of oil for 
export destination.  These Members noted that Ar ticle XI of the GATT 1994 provided that "other 
measures" could not be used to prohibit or restrict the exportation or sale for export of any 
product destined for the territory of another Member.  These Members stated that Kazakhstan was expected to eliminate the discriminatory pricing applicable to oil destined for export prior to its 
WTO accession.   
162.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan had discontinued the practice of 
application of decreasing coefficients for transporta tion of crude oil to domestic refineries in 2010.  
Instead, the tariffs for transportation of crude oi l by mainline pipelines for export and domestic 
destinations were calculated separately based on actual costs, reasonable profits and the physical 
capacity of pipelines.  Such an approach was ne cessary to ensure transparency in the accounting 
of revenues, costs and operational assets in regulated services, as well as transparency in the 
elaboration of tariff estimates, and the tariff calculation for regulated services delivered by natural 
monopolies.   
163.  Some Members also noted that the differential oil transport fees applied by Kazakhstan 
were in conflict with the provisions of Arti cle V of the GATT 1994 on freedom of transit.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that there was no discriminatory treatment with respect to transit routes in Kazakhstan.  As of 2004, oil transit from the Russian Federation to the People's Republic of China through Kazakhstan had been conducted by the 
"Omsk-Pavlodar-Atasu" pipeline, the only transit pipeline of crude oil via Kazakhstan.  The transit 
tariffs were regulated by the Agreement between the Government of Kazakhstan and the Government of the Russian Federation on Transi t of Crude Oil of 7 June 2002, as amended in 
November 2009.  
164.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the scope of services monopolization in the 
railway services market, subject to State regulati on as natural monopoly, had been reduced due to 
the restructuring of the railway transport sector which had begun in 2004.  As a result of these 
reforms, currently only the services of mainline railway networks were regulated by the State as 
natural monopoly.  Different tariffs for railway transportation were set depending on distance, rolling stock (wagons) type, cargo and destinat ion.  In her view, the application of these 
differential tariffs did not contradict WTO requirements.  She noted that, in the context of the 
restructuring of the railway transportation sector between 2006 and 2013, her Government had undertaken a gradual unification of tariffs charged for the mainline railway services in domestic, 
export and import routes.  During the first stage, in 2006, tariffs for transportation of construction 
materials, ferrous and non-ferrous metals and their scrap had been unified.  During the second stage, in 2010, tariffs for transportation of crude oil and coal had also been unified.  During the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 41 - 
 
  third stage, in 2011, the unification of tariffs had continued with respect to non-ferrous ore, iron 
ore, alcohol and alcoholic beverages.  The unification of tariffs had been completed during the fourth stage in 2012 for all remaining goods, including chemical and mineral fertilizers, chemicals and sodium bicarbonate, petroleum products and grain.   
165.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan's authorities had a very large discretionary margin to 
qualify activities as natural monopolies, and said that this Member did not consider, for instance, telecommunications and postal services to be natural monopolies.  Another Member asked 
Kazakhstan to explain how there was competition in the markets dominated by natural 
monopolies.   
166.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan reiterated that, as evidenced by the 
description of ongoing reforms in key sectors of the economy, her Government was pursuing 
liberalization programmes in order to facilitate competition and reduce the list of natural 
monopolies.  In particular, her Government had reduced the types of regulated postal services.  The list had originally included eight types of postal services but had subsequently been reduced to 
only universal postal services (cards, letters, packages and postal wrapper).  Regarding 
telecommunication services, she said that the scope of services subject to Government regulation as natural monopoly had been reduced and currently included only:  (i) telecommunication 
services under conditions of absence of competing operators for reasons of technological 
infeasibility or commercial inexpediency; and, (ii) leasing or use of cable channels and other basic facilities technologically related to connecting telecommunication.  In addition, operator connection services (to the services of the universal telecommunication network) and telephone transit 
services would remain regulated and would only be excluded from the list of natural monopolies 
after the development of a competitive environment.   
167.  Some Members stated that enterprises that had a monopoly position in international trade 
and/or domestic distribution should be notified under the Understanding on the Interpretation of 
Article XVII of the GATT 1994, and enquired whethe r Kazakhstan intended to notify any of its 
"natural" monopolies.  A Member said that ther e was ample evidence that State-owned natural 
monopolies in Kazakhstan did not grant equal access, as transporters, and enjoyed extensive 
special privileges.   
168.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that natural monopolies in Kazakhstan acted as 
transport carriers with equal non-discriminatory (open) access for all suppliers and operators, 
regardless of the form and type of ownership.  In  this respect, she pointed to Article 2 of Law 
No. 266-II "On Railway Transport" of 8 December 2001, which stipulated the principle of non-discriminatory access to railway transport services for all participants of transport market.  
The "Rules of Non-Discriminatory Access for Carriers to the Services of the Mainline Railway" 
approved by Order of the Minister of Transport and Communications No. 401-I of 
8 November 2004, had been repealed in October 2012.  In her view, no exclusive rights or special 
privileges were granted to natural monopolies and, therefore, natural monopolies did not fall under 
the notification requirements of the Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XVII of the GATT 1994. 
169.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that, upon accession, the Government of 
Kazakhstan would, in regulating prices, ensure that State-owned enterprises and natural 
monopolies in Kazakhstan, in respect of their supplies of goods to industrial users, would recover their costs, including a reasonable profit in the or dinary course of their business.  Kazakhstan was 
also asked to confirm that the application of price controls on goods and services would be in a 
manner consistent with WTO obligations, including Article III:9 of the GATT 1994, and that price controls would not be used for purposes of affording protection to domestic industries or service 
providers.   
170.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply price controls on products and services contained in Annex 4 of this Report, and any similar measures that would be introduced or re-introduced in the future, in a manner consistent 
with the WTO Agreement.  She further confirmed that price control measures on goods would take 
account of the interests of exporting Members, as provided for in Article III:9 of the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994.  Price control measures would not be used for purposes of 
affording protection to domestic production of goods, or to impair the services commitments of 
Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that the lists of goods and services WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 42 - 
 
  subject to State price controls in Annex 4 of this Report were comprehensive, and that, from the 
date of accession, Kazakhstan would publish in  the Yegemen Kazakhstan and the Kazakhstanskaya 
Pravda, notice of any changes in the coverage of  goods or services that were subject to price 
controls.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Competition Policy 
171.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal basis for the competition policy 
within the EAEU was Section XVIII "Common Principl es and Rules of Competition" (Articles 74-77) 
and Annex No. 19 "Protocol on Common Principles an d Rules of Competition" of the EAEU Treaty.  
These provisions replaced the Agreement on Co mmon Principles and Rules of Competition of 
9 December 2010, which was terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  From 1 January 2015, Section XVIII and Annex No. 19 of the EAEU Treaty were 
aimed at development of common principles and ru les of competition, ensuring prevention of 
anticompetitive actions on the territories of the EAEU member States, and actions that might have 
negative impact on competition in trans-boundary markets. 
172.  The Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter: EEC or Commission) had the competence 
to prevent violations of common rules of competition by market participants, natural persons and non-commercial organizations of the EAEU member Stat es if such violations affected or might have 
affected competition in trans-boundary markets, except for violations, affecting competition in 
trans-boundary financial markets, prevention of  which was performed in accordance with the 
national legislation of the member States. 
173.  The Commission had the competence to:   
(i) review applications (materials) on existence of signs of violations of common rules of 
competition, which affected or might have  affected competition on trans-boundary 
markets, and carry out necessary investigations;  
(ii) initiate and consider cases on  violation of common rules of competition, which affected or 
might have affected competition on trans-boundary markets, on the basis of the appeals by the competent authorities of the memb er States, economic operators (market 
participants) of the member States, state bodies of the member States, natural persons or 
on its own initiative;  
(iii) make determinations and adopt decisions binding for economic operators (market 
participants), including on application of penalties to economic operators  (market 
participants), regarding actions aimed at termination of violations of common competition 
rules; elimination of consequences of violations of common competition rules; ensuring competition; prevention of actions which might have hindered establishment of 
competition and/or might result in restriction, elimination of competition on trans-
boundary markets and violations of common rules of competition;  
(iv) request information from competent authorities of the member States, local executive 
bodies, other bodies or organizations carryin g out their functions, natural and juridical 
persons, including confidential information necessary to fulfill competence to control over compliance with common competition rules on trans-boundary markets;  and,  
(v)  undertake other functions, necessary to implement the common competition rules 
established by Section XVIII and Annex No. 19 of the EAEU Treaty. 
174.  She further added that anti-monopoly legislation of Kazakhstan was developed in line with 
the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and comprised, inter alia,  of the relevant provisions 
of the Civil Code, Code No.155-III "On Administrative Offences" of 30 January 2001 (hereinafter: 
Code of Administrative Offences), and Law No. 112-IV "On Competition" of 25 December 2008 (hereinafter: Law "On Competition"), that had entered into force on 1 January 2009.  This Law 
replaced Law No. 173-III "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities" of 7 July 2006 
and Law No. 232-I "On Unfair Competition" of 9 June 1998.  Law "On Competition" was last amended by Law No. 81-V of 6 March 2013.     
175.  The key objective of Law "On Competition" was protection of free competition and creation 
of a favorable environment for entrepreneuria l and investment activities, and growth of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 43 - 
 
  businesses.  This was to be achieved through:   (i) prevention of monopolistic activities; 
(ii) prevention of unfair competition; (iii) de-monopolization of industries; (iv) development of fair and free competition; and, (v) protection of consumer interests.  Law "On Competition" was directly applicable and did not contain references to by-laws.   
176.  The Committee on Regulation of Natural Monopolies and Protection of Competition of the 
Ministry of National Economy (hereinafter in this Section: Committee) was responsible for implementation of the national policy aimed at developing competition and restricting monopolistic 
activities.  The main functions of the Committee were:  (i) to promote development of fair 
competition; (ii) to prevent, detect and investigate violations of the anti-monopoly legislation of Kazakhstan; (iii) to control economic concentration; and, (iv) de-monopolization of market participants that restrained competition.  The development of State policy on competition and 
restriction of monopolistic activities was one of the key functions of the Ministry of National 
Economy.   
177.  Asked about measures taken in the framework of de-monopolization, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that the decisions on de-m onopolization of sectors of the economy were 
made by the Government based on results of the commodity markets analysis conducted by the Committee.  For instance, in 2011, the Committee conducted the analysis of interconnection and 
traffic transmission (interconnection) in telecommunication services.  Based on the results of the 
analysis, the Government took the decision to exclude interconnection services from the sphere of natural monopolies and transfer to competitive en vironment.  Moreover, within the framework of 
de-monopolization policies, Law "On Competition" stipulated rules, under which State enterprises 
and juridical persons and their affiliates, where the Government owned 50% or more shares, had 
to receive the positive conclusion from the Committee for further activities in the relevant commodity market.  In 2011, 3% of such enterpri ses were transferred to competitive environment 
(including enterprises in such spheres as maintenance of hotels and resorts, maintenance of car 
parks, construction, etc.). 
178.  Asked about merger control regulation, the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
according to sub-paragraph 1, paragraph 1 of Article 50 of Law "On Competition", regulating 
issues related to control over economic concentration, merger transactions fell under the notion of economic concentration.  Articles 49-57 of Law "On Competition" regulated issues of economic concentration control.  The Committee conducted control over economic concentration via an 
approval procedure of merger transactions (actions).  In reply to a specific question on current 
merger thresholds to trigger the obligation for notification in Kazakhstan, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that consent of the Committee to perform transactions, acknowledged as 
economic concentration, was required in the following cases:  (i) merger or acquisition of a market 
participant; (ii) acquisition by a person / group of  persons of more than 25% of the voting shares 
(right of participation) of a market participant, if previously this person / group of persons had not 
held the shares (right of participation) of a market participant, or its portion was less than 25%; 
and, (iii) obtaining ownership, including in payment of the charter capital by a market participant (group of persons) of the main industrial assets and/or intangible assets of a market participant, if the balance value of the property subject to the transaction exceeded 10% of the balance value of 
the main industrial and intangible assets.  Consent for economic concentration with participation of 
financial organizations could be given in case when the value of assets or amount of equity capital of a financial organization exceeded the amount  jointly established by the Committee and the 
National Bank of Kazakhstan for financial organizations.  Market participants had to notify the 
Committee in the following cases of economic concentration:  (i) acquisition of rights (including rights on the basis of trust management agreemen t and joint activity agreement) by the market 
participant allowing him/her to give mandatory instructions to other market participant when 
conducting commercial activities or to perform functions of its executive body; and, (ii) participation of the same natural persons in executive bodies, boards of directors, supervisory boards, and other managing bodies of two or more market participants if these natural persons 
determine conditions of commercial activities conducted by the market participant.  In accordance 
with paragraph 3 Article 50 of  Law "On Competition", the consent and notification mentioned above were required if the aggregate balance value of assets of reorganized market participants 
(group of persons) or the acquirer (group of pe rsons), and also market participant whose voting 
shares (rights of participation) in the charter capital had been acquired, or their aggregate volume WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 44 - 
 
  of goods sold for the last financial year exceeded 10 million Monthly Calculation Index13, or one of 
the persons participating in the transaction was a market participant with dominant or monopolistic position on the relevant goods market.  The consent of the Committee was not required for the following cases, not considered as economic concentration:  (i) acquisition of 
shares (rights of participation) of the market participant by financial organizations, if this 
acquisition was conducted with the aim of further resale, with the condition that this financial organization did not have voting rights in th e managing bodies of the market participant; 
(ii) acquisition by financial organizations of property, main production assets and/or intangible 
assets of another market participant with the aim of repayment of the debtor's liability fully or in part, if this acquisition was conducted with the aim of further resale, with the condition that these financial organizations did not use such proper ty to gain profit in their own interest; 
(iii) appointment of rehabilitation or bankruptcy manager, temporary administration (temporary 
administrator); and, (iv) economic concentration within one group of persons.  
179.  Asked about the test for a merger to be prohib ited, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that, according to Law "On Competition", a general rule was that all mergers leading to restriction 
of competition were prohibited.    
180.  Consent of the Committee could be granted provided that the participants of the economic 
concentration fulfilled certain requirements and commitments eliminating or alleviating the 
negative impact on competition.  For instance, economic concentration should not result in the following: 
- restriction of competition; 
- breach of the conditions contracted with customers; 
- suspension of services being rendered; - deterioration of quality of the services rendered; 
- non-fulfilment of the commitments under the investment contracts concluded with the 
Ministry of Investments and Development; and, 
- unreasonable reduction of production or sales.  
181.  Such conditions could include restriction in management, use or disposal of property.  
The Committee, on its own initiative or upon the application of an interested person, could change its decision on economic concentration in cases when:  
- within three years upon its adoption, the circ umstances giving reasons to reject it were 
revealed; 
- it was adopted on the basis of unreliable information, which led to the adoption of an 
illegal decision; and, 
- requirements and undertaken commitments were not fulfiled.   
182.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that Law "On Competition" distinguished three 
types of monopolistic activities:  (i) anti-competitive agreements; (ii) anti-competitive coordinated 
actions; and, (iii) abuse of dominant or monopolistic position.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
noted that agreements or coordinated action s between competing and non-competing market 
participants, as well as agreements of State and local executive bodies, or between State bodies 
and market participants, were prohibited when they restricted competition or violated the rights of 
natural and juridical persons, including by establishing and/or maintaining cooperative pricing or 
other conditions of acquiring and selling goods, unreasonable limitation of production or sale of goods, unreasonable refusal to conclude contracts with certain sellers (providers) or buyers, and 
application of discriminating conditions to equivalent contracts with other market participants.  
She further explained that Law "On Competition" differentiated between "anti-competitive coordinated actions" and "anti-competitive agreements".  The difference between anti-competitive 
agreements and anti-competitive coordinated actions was that anti-competitive agreements 
provided for intended written arrangement betw een market participants to conclude anti-
competitive agreements, for example, agreements on sale of products at the same price or within 
certain territory.   
                                               
13 One Monthly Calculation Index (MCI) was equal to KZT 1,852 in 2014 (around US$10); 10 million MCI 
equaled to approximately US$100 million in 2014. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 45 - 
 
  183.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Law "On Competition" redefined the term 
"group of persons".  Abuse of dominant or mo nopolistic position by a group of persons was 
considered as abuse by a single market participant.   Market participants were not obliged to seek 
for approval of economic concentration in cases when transactions were made within one group of 
persons.  Law "On Competition" also contained new definitions of what constituted dominant and 
monopolistic positions.  The position of a market participant(s) in the relevant commodity market was recognised as dominant or monopolistic if such market participant(s) acquired a capability to 
control the market.  A market participant was deemed to have a dominant position if it had a 
share of 35% or more of the relevant market.  Several market participants were considered to have a dominant position (i) if the aggregate share of up to three market participants in a given commodity market was equal or exceeded 50%; or, (ii) if the aggregate share of up to four major 
market participants in a given commodity market was equal to or exceeded 70%.  A financial 
organization was deemed to have a dominant position (i) if the aggregate share of up to two financial organizations in a given financial services market was equal to or exceeded 50%; or, (ii) 
if the aggregate share of up to three financial or ganizations in a given financial services market 
equalled or exceeded 70%.  A company with less than a 15% share of the market, including a 
financial services market, could not qualify as a company with a dominant position.  Natural 
monopolies, state monopolies and market partic ipants that owned 100% dominant share in the 
relevant commodity market were considered as companies (market participants) with a monopolistic position. 
184.  Asked to clarify the differences between the concepts of dominant or monopolistic position 
and monopolistic activity, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the concept of 
monopolistic activity was wider than the concept of dominant or monopolistic position.  Monopolistic activity was an activity or actions performed by a market participant, while dominant 
or monopolistic position was a characteristic of a ma rket participant, defined by the market share.  
According to paragraph 4 of Article 26 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
monopolistic activity was regulated by the law.  Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position had to observe restrictions set-out in Law "On Competition".  Hence, monopolistic activity 
was restricted, but not prohibited.  Types of monopolistic activities restricted by Law "On Competition" are described in paragraph 182.   
185.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the dominant 
or monopolistic position itself was not considered breach of the anti-monopoly legislation.  
Article 13 of Law "On Competition" listed prohibited cases of abuse of dominant or monopolistic position:  
- establishment and maintenance of monopolistically high/low or monopsonistically low 
prices;  
- application of different prices or conditions to equivalent agreements with market 
participants or customers without objectively justified reasons;  
- establishing restrictions for distribution of goods / works / services based on territorial 
factors, group of customers, purchasing conditions, and also quality and price;  
- preconditioning or imposing a conclusion of an agreement where a market participant or a 
customer would accept additional obligations which, in their essence or according to 
customary business practice, were not related to the subject of such agreement; 
- unreasonable refusal to conclude an agreement with or sell goods / works / services to 
independent customers while having the ability to produce (or sell) goods / works / 
services.  This also included avoidance from concluding such an agreement within thirty calendar days of a request;  
- preconditioning supply of goods / works / serv ices to accept restrictions for purchasing 
goods / works / services, produced or sold by competitors;  
- unjustified reduction of volumes of production  and/or supply, including production and/or 
supply of goods / works / services, for which there was demand or customer orders; 
- withdrawal of goods / works / services from circulation, if it resulted in price increase; 
- imposition of economically or technologicall y unjustified agreement terms on a partner, not 
connected with the subject of the agreement; 
- creation of obstacles for other market participants to enter or exit from a goods / works / 
services market; and, 
- unjustified establishment of different prices / tariffs on the same goods / works / services, 
creating discriminating conditions.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 46 - 
 
  In addition, Kazakhstan's legislation did not provide penalty for dominant or monopolistic 
position itself, but only for abuse and actions to restrict competition.  
186.  In reply to the question of a Member regarding economic indicators taken into account for 
identification of market participants with dominant or monopolistic position, the representative of 
Kazakhstan noted that in accordance with the "Methodology on Analysis and Assessment of the 
Competitive Environment in the Commodity Market",  approved by Order of the Chairman of the 
Antimonopoly Agency No. 8-OD of 12 January 2009, and the "Methodology on Analysis and 
Assessment of the Competitive Environment in the Financial Services Market", approved by Order 
of the Chairman of the Antimonopoly Agency  No. 57-OD of 19 February 2009, the Committee 
conducted analysis of the competition environment.  The results of the analysis provided the picture of development of competition in the given market and identified market participants with 
dominant or monopolistic position.  The methodology of analysis included the following steps:  
(i) identification of goods or substitute goods; ( ii) identification of geographical boundaries of the 
commodity market; (iii) identification of time inte rvals; (iv) identification of structure of the 
market; (v) calculation of commodity market volu me and shares of market participants in the 
market; (vi) assessment of competitive environment in the commodity market; and, (vii) detection of entry barriers to the commodity market.  Based on these factors the Committee drew its 
findings on the competition environment. 
187.  Law "On Competition" expanded the list of types of unfair competition which included the 
following:  (i) illegal use of trademarks and pack aging; (ii) illegal use of a product of another 
manufacturer; (iii) copying product design; (iv) di screditing a market participant; (v) deliberately 
misleading, unfair and false advertisement; (vi) tie-in sale of goods; (vii) calling for a boycott of a 
seller / provider; (viii) calling for discrimination against a buyer / supplier; (ix) calling for a market participant to terminate a contract with a competitor; (x) bribing a seller's (provider's) employee; 
(xi) bribing a buyer's employee; (xii) illegal use of trade secrets; (xiii) selling goods while 
providing the customer with unreliable information regarding the character, method and place of production, consumer properties, the goods' qualit ies and quantities and/or its producers; and, 
(xiv) improper comparison by the market participant of its goods with the goods produced and/or 
sold by other market participants.   
188.  The State could participate in commercial activity in the following cases:  (i) failure to 
ensure national security, national defence capability and protection of the social interests by other 
means; (ii) use of State-owned strategic objects; and, (iii) public need in public manufacturing of 
goods where competition was absent or underdeveloped.   In the last case, the activities of public 
enterprises were regulated in coordination with the Committee.  The State could participate in 
commercial activities in the form of the following types of enterprises:  (a) a State enterprise, or, 
(b) a juridical person 50% or more shares (rights of participation) of which belonged to the State and its affiliated entities.  State enterprises could engage only in the spheres stipulated in 
Article 134 of Law No. 413-IV "On State Property" of 1 March 2011 (see Annex 3(F) of this 
Report).  If establishment of such enterprises was not directly mentioned in the laws of Kazakhstan, consent of the Committee was required in the cases mentioned in clause (iii) above.  The Committee could deny creation of a State enterpri se or a juridical person by the State, if such 
creation could lead to restriction of competition on the market where there was no competition or 
it was underdeveloped.  Nevertheless, the Committ ee could grant its consent if a State enterprise 
or a juridical person undertook special commitments to eliminate or alleviate negative impact on 
competition.   
189.  Law "On Competition" also introduced the term "state monopoly" as the exclusive right of 
the State to produce and/or sell, purchase or use goods.  The State had the right to restrict 
competition by establishing a State monopoly only in those spheres where sale of goods on the 
competitive market could have negative consequences for the constitutional system, national security, protection of public order, human rights and freedoms, or health of people.  
The representative of Kazakhstan added that a State monopoly could be established only by law.  
State monopolies could be established only in the form of State enterprises by the decision of the 
Government or local executive bodies.  In reply to a specific question, she said that the notion of 
"state monopoly" differed from the notion of "natural monopoly".   
190.  State monopoly activities were defined in Law No. 85-II "On Safeguarding Activity" of 
19 October 2000, Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002, Law No. 456-I "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of G oods" of 26 July 1999, Law No. 422-I "On Protection WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 47 - 
 
  of Selective Achievements" of 13 July 1999, Law No. 331-II "On Plant Protection" of 3 July 2002, 
Law No. 593-II "On Protection, Reproduction and Use of Fauna" of 9 July 2004, Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 Ju ly 1999, as well as Land Code of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan No. 442-II of 20 June 2003 and Fore stry Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 477-II of 8 July 2003.  The Committee was responsible for regulation and monitoring activities 
of State monopolies.  At present, State monopolies provided special types of services, including:  hydrometeorological monitoring and monitoring of the environmental situation; liquidation of 
centres of extra hazardous contagious animal diseases; security services for facilities subject to 
the State protection; production of identification documents of the Republic of Kazakhstan; monitoring of education quality, etc.  Kazakhstan's legislation did not prohibit private sector participation in sectors where State enterprises were present, except in the spheres of State 
monopoly.  She explained that Law No. 34-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative 
Acts on Issues of State Monopoly" of 10 July 2012 provided for the reduction of State monopoly  spheres by inviting the private businesses to certai n sectors.  According to this Law, activities 
transferred to the competitive market included certification and registration of selective-seed and 
selective-genetic facilities located on the territory of the State Forest Fund, disposal of waste, construction and operation of landfills, and accred itation in the sphere of conformity assessment. 
191.  In reply to a specific question on the sco pe of exemption for State monopolies, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the scope of activities of State monopolies was narrower than the sphere of activities of State enterpri ses engaged in commercial activity.  The types of 
State monopoly activities were defined in special legal acts, which clearly stipulated the types and 
scopes of their activities.  State monopolies were not allowed to:  
- produce goods / works / services, not connected with the State monopoly sphere; 
- hold shares (rights of participation in the charter capital) and participate otherwise in 
activities of juridical persons; 
- transfer rights associated with State monopoly; and - establish prices for produced or sold goods / works / services, different from those 
established by the Government.  
192.  The Committee initiated investigations upon receiving information on violations of anti-
monopoly legislation such as:  (i) files/documents from the Government bodies; (ii) application from a natural or juridical person; (iii) detection by the Committee of anti-monopoly legislation 
violations; (iv) appeal to the Committee by the mass media; and (v) information in the mass 
media.  The Committee within its competencies conducted investigations on violations of anti-monopoly legislation and adopted a decision  based on its results.  Investigation was 
conducted within two months from the date of issuing an order of its initiation.  This term could be 
extended for up to two months.  
193.  The representative of Kazakhstan added th at the Committee took one of the following 
decisions on the basis of investigation results to:  (i) suspend an investigation in cases envisaged 
by Law "On Competition"; (ii) initiate administrative proceedings; (iii) adopt instructions on elimination of the anti-monopoly legislation violations; or, (iv) initiate criminal proceedings by the law enforcement bodies.  
194.  She informed Members that Article 147 of Code of "Administrative Offences" provided the 
following sanctions for violations of the anti-monopoly legislation:  a fine in the amount of 150 Monthly Calculation  Index (MCI) for individual entrepreneurs, 5% of receipts from the 
monopolistic activity for small and medium-sized  businesses, and 10% of receipts from the 
monopolistic activity for other businesses.  Articl e 196 of the Criminal Code provided for criminal 
liability for actions causing severe damage, includin g fines of 500 to 1,000 MCI, or up to two years 
of correctional labour, custodial restraint, or imprisonment.  For repeated offences, or for actions 
committed by (organized) groups or officials, the sanctions consisted of fines in the amount of 1,000 to 2,000 MCI, or the equivalent of five to seven months' salary or other income of the convicted person, or imprisonment for up to five  years that could be accompanied by deprivation 
of the right to hold specific posts or engage in ce rtain activities for up to three years, and property 
expropriation.  Offences committed with the use of force or the threat to use force or which could lead to damage, or threat of damage of third party's property, were punishable by three to seven 
years of imprisonment that could be accompanied by property expropriation. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 48 - 
 
  195.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that Chapters 9, 10 and 11 of Law 
"On Competition", defined responsibilities for violation of the anti-monopoly legislation and established procedures for adoption, appeal, and execution of instructions and decisions taken by the Committee.  The Committee had the right to review administrative violations regarding 
competition protection and restriction of monopolistic activity, impose administrative sanctions 
provided in Code of "Administrative Offences" and appeal to the courts for enforcement of its instructions and decisions.  Law "On Competition" did not provide for introduction of fixed prices 
by the Government in case of repeated abuses by market dominating entities of their monopolistic 
positions.  In a case in which a market participant that had a dominant or monopolistic position and violated twice within one calendar year the provisions of Law No. 112-IV on (i) "anti-
competitive agreements"; (ii) "anti-competitive c oordinated actions"; and, (iii) abuse of dominant 
or monopolistic position; and continued taking actions that restrained competition, the Committee 
had the right to appeal to the court seeking the splitting of the market participant into several 
juridical persons or the detachment of one or several juridical persons from the market participant.  
The instructions and decisions of the Committee could be appealed in accordance with the 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The instructions of the territorial bodies of the 
Committee could be appealed to the Committee or directly to the courts within three months of the 
date of handling of an appeal to the entity concerned.   
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES 
- Powers of Executive, Legislative an d Judicial Branches of Government 
196.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Republic of Kazakhstan was a unitary 
State with a Presidential form of Government.  Power was divided among the legislative, executive 
and judicial branches.  The President ensured the c oordinated functioning of all branches of power.  
The Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan wa s the highest representative body and performed 
legislative functions.  The Government exercised executive power, headed the executive bodies and provided guidance to them.  Judicial power was exercised through civil, criminal and other 
statutory forms of judicial proceedings by the Supreme Court, local courts and other courts.  
197.  The President was elected for five year terms on the basis of universal, equal and direct 
suffrage by secret ballot.  The President a ppointed and could dismiss the members of the 
Government (including the Prime Minister, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Defence, Internal 
Affairs and Justice, and the Heads of State Committ ees), the Heads of diplomatic missions, higher 
Officers of the Armed Forces, the Chairperson and two members of the Constitutional Council, the Chairperson and two members of the Central Election Committee, the Chairperson and 
two members of the Accounting Committee for Contro l Over the Implementation of the Republican 
Budget, 15 Deputies of the Senate, chairperso ns and judges of local and other courts, the 
Prosecutor General, the Chairperson of the National Security Committee, the State Secretary, the 
Chairperson of the National Bank, and Akims. 
198.  The President approved laws submitted by the Senate (the upper house of the Parliament) 
within one month, or returned laws with his comments to the Parliament for consideration, to be reviewed within one month.  If the specified deadline was not met, the President's objection would 
prevail and the law was adopted in the version pr oposed by the President.  If the Parliament 
overturned the President's objection by a two-thirds majority vote of each Chamber, the law was adopted in the version initially proposed by the Parliament.  In cases where the Parliament failed 
to overturn the President's objection, the la w was adopted in the version proposed by the 
President.  The President could prioritize draft laws for consideration by the Parliament and could invite the Parliament to announce a draft law as urgent, i.e., to be considered within one month of 
its submission.  If such a request was not fulfille d, the President could issue a decree, which would 
remain in effect until the adoption of the new law by the Parliament.  Laws came into force within ten calendar days after the date of their first official publication, unless the laws or the relevant implementation acts had specified different terms for entry into force.  The Parliament could 
delegate its legislative powers to the President fo r a period of up to one year, while the President 
had the right to dissolve the Parliament in certai n circumstances.  The President could decide to 
hold a national referendum, to issue decrees, and to issue decrees having the force of a law. 
199.  The Parliament was a bicameral legislative body, consisting of a lower chamber, called the 
Majilis, and an upper chamber, called the Senate.  The Parliament was responsible for adopting WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 49 - 
 
  constitutional laws, laws, resolutions of the Parliament, separate resolutions of the Senate and the 
Majilis, and for passing Constitutional amendments, upon the initiative of the President.  The Parliament could adopt and amend the State budget, as well as put forward an initiative calling for a national referendum.  At separate sessions, the Majilis, and then the Senate, ratified 
international treaties and took decisions on State loans and other forms of economic assistance.  
The Senate, inter alia , had exclusive jurisdiction, at the init iative of the President, to elect and 
discharge the Chairperson and Justices of the Supreme Court.  The Majilis, inter alia , had exclusive 
jurisdiction to accept draft laws for consideration and to announce regular Presidential elections.   
200.  The Government was organized and chaired by the Prime Minister.  The Government was 
accountable to the President and to the Parliament.  The Government submitted draft laws to the Majilis, and was responsible for their implementati on when enacted.  By-laws in the form of 
resolutions and directives could be issued by the Government.  By-laws of the Government, as well 
as the acts of municipal chief executives could be annulled by the President.  The mandate of the Government expired with that of the President, unless specifically terminated by the President. 
201.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Government was responsible for directing 
the national socio-economic policy.  Kazakhstan's socio-economic and trade policies were developed and coordinated by the Ministry of Nati onal Economy.  The Ministry of Investments and 
Development was the principal body responsible for development of industrial and investment 
policies.   
202.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the governmental authority in Kazakhstan 
was administered at both the central and regional levels.  Local governmental power was divided 
between representative bodies called Maslikhats and executive bodies called Akimats.  Akimats 
were local executive bodies.  These were headed by Akims - representatives of the President and 
the Government - who (i) administered the local executive bodies; (ii) ensured the implementation 
of State policy on the relevant territory; and, (iii) ensured the coordinated functioning of all 
territorial branches of the central State bodies.  Akims also fulfilled the functions of a local public administration and were responsible for the social  and economic development of the administered 
territory.  She further noted that local governments had (i) partial autonomy to regulate 
region-specific economic relations; (ii) a regional (local) administrative system; (iii) the authority to make provisions for the development of business activities; (iv) the right to conclude concession contracts; (v) the authority to monitor the local budget; and, (vi) the obligation to coordinate 
foreign trade-related issues.  
203.  Referring to item (vi) of the preceding paragraph, some Members asked the representative 
of Kazakhstan to explain if local administration bodies had to consult with the Government when 
initiating foreign trade-related projects and if they had an obligation to perform foreign trade 
activity on behalf of the Government.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Article 61 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, only the President, as 
well as members of the Parliament and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan had the 
right to initiate legislation, and local administrative bodies did not have the right to initiate legislation related to foreign trade.  Local administrative bodies had the right to submit their proposals on the improvement of legislation to the Government, which in turn had the right to 
initiate the drafting of a regulatory legal ac t on the basis of the submitted proposals.  
Local administrative bodies were not authorized to perform foreign trade activities on behalf of the Government.  However, they had to adhere to the national foreign, internal, financial and 
investment policies, determined by the State (Government, President and Parliament).  
204.  Asked to explain the relationship between local (sub-central) authorities and the central 
Government in the implementation of WTO provisions, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, 
according to Article 4 of Law No. 148-II "On Local Government in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
23 January 2001, Maslikhats and Akimats did not have the right to adopt decisions inconsistent with national policy or Kazakhstan's international commitments, as set-out in ratified international agreements.  In particular, sub-central authorities could not independently impose measures 
aimed at hindering the free exchange of goods and services within the country, such as imposing 
taxes and issuing regulations.  Decisions of Akims or Maslikhats, which derogated from Kazakhstan's commitments ensuing from international agreements (including WTO commitments), 
could be annulled by the President, the Government, the Akim, as well as through court 
procedures.  In addition, the Prosecutor General' s Office exercised constant supervision over the 
precise and uniform application of laws and other legislative acts. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 50 - 
 
  205.  Judicial power was exercised by means of civil,  criminal, and other legislation, within the 
framework of a three-tier unitary court system .  The Supreme Court was the supreme body for 
civil, criminal and other cases.  It exercised supervisory powers over the conduct of general jurisdiction courts within a statutory framework, and provided clarifications on issues relating to 
court practice.  The Supreme Court could also act as a nisi prius  court (first instance court) whose 
decisions came into legal force from the date of their adoption.  Oblast and rayon (district) courts were courts of first instance, and proceedings conducted in these courts took place within 
two months upon receipt of the claim.  This period could vary, however, depending on the 
category of civil case.  Questions challenging the co nstitutionality of laws or by-laws were reviewed 
by the Constitutional Council. 
206.  She further explained that Code No.155-II "On Administrative Offences" of 
30 January 2001 was aimed at preventing administra tive violations, while protecting the rights, 
freedoms and lawful interests of persons, citizens  and organizations.  The Code addressed issues 
concerning the sanitary and epidemiological welfare and health of the population, the 
environment, public morals, property, public or der and safety, and the established procedure for 
exercising State powers.  A hearing with a judge or an authorized body usually took place within 15 days (with a possible one month extension).  A request to reconsider the rulings of a judge or 
an authorized body could be made within one year from the date the court decision entered into 
force; the submission of such a request suspende d the ruling's execution.  The Prosecutor-General 
or his deputies could ask a board of the Supreme Court to verify the legality and legal grounds of a decision on administrative violations, which had already taken legal effect.  The Supreme Court 
could reconsider previous rulings made by oblast and rayon (district) courts. 
207.  Some Members asked whether, following accession, the WTO Agreement would have 
priority over Kazakhstan's national legislation and further sought a description of how, in legal 
terms, would WTO rules and commitments be ratified.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that paragraph 3 of Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan stipulated that international agreements ratified by Kazakhstan, had priority over national 
legislation and this provision also applied to the te rms of the Protocol of Accession of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan to the WTO.  Ratified international agreements were applied directly, except in cases when a law had to be adopted before an international agreement became applicable.  Asked to confirm that Kazakhstan needed to adopt a law domestically in order to make the 
WTO Agreement applicable, the representative of Ka zakhstan replied that a law had to be adopted 
in cases, where (i) the current legislation did not comply with the WTO Agreement and had to be amended to comply with the WTO Agreement; or , (ii) issues contained in the WTO Agreement 
were not addressed in existing legislation.  Kazakhstan would ensure compliance of its legislation 
with commitments undertaken in accordance with the Protocol of Accession of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO.  In accordance with the procedure of intergovernmental approval, it was 
planned that for the ratification of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, a draft law to that effect 
would be introduced to the Ministry of Justice, then presented to the Prime Minister's Cabinet for government approval and, finally, sent to the Parliament for enactment upon approval by both Chambers of the Parliament.  Current plans were for the draft law to be enacted in the first half of 
2015.  She also stressed that no contradictions were expected to arise between WTO Membership 
obligations and those obligations contained in th e Protocol of Accession of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO and Kazakhstan's international agreements.  
208.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the provisions of the WTO Agreement 
would be applied uniformly throughout the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including in regions engaging in frontier traffic, special economic zones and other areas where special regimes 
for tariffs, taxes and regulations could be established.  She added that, in order to ensure 
compliance with provisions of the WTO Agreement any individual or entity could bring to the attention of the authorities of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan or competent 
EAEU body cases of non-application or non-uniform application of provisions of the 
WTO Agreement in the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Such cases would be referred promptly to the 
responsible authorities without requiring the affected party to petition through the courts, and when non-application or non-uniform application actually existed, the authorities of the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  o r  a competent EAEU body would act promptly to 
address the situation, consistent with the laws and international obligations of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  The individual or entity notifying the authorities of the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan or a competent EAEU body would be in formed promptly in writing of any decision and 
action taken.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 51 - 
 
  209.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confir med that with respect to matters subject to 
the WTO Agreement, Kazakhstan's authorities would provide the right for independent review in conformity with WTO obligations, including but not restricted to, Article X:3(b) of the WTO General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, and releva nt provisions of the WTO Agreement on Trade-
Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights  and the WTO General Agreement on Trade in 
Services.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Framework of the Eurasian Economic Un ion of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the 
Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus 
(a) Legal Framework Establishing the Eurasian Economic Union 
210.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Me mbers that on 29 May 2014, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (Kazakhstan), the Russian Federation (Russia) and the Republic of Belarus (Belarus) 
had concluded the Eurasian Economic Union Treaty (hereinafter: the EAEU Treaty).  The EAEU 
Treaty established the Eurasian Economic Union (E AEU) with the aim to create free movement of 
goods, services, capital and natural persons as well as coordinated or agreed policy in the sectors 
of economy, defined by the Treaty and internat ional treaties within the EAEU.  The EAEU was 
established as an international organization of regional economic integration with international legal personality.  The EAEU Treaty replaced the international agreements concluded within the 
Customs Union (CU) and the Single Economic Space (SES) listed in its Annex No. 33 "Protocol on 
Termination of International Treaties, Concluded within the Framework of Formation of the Customs Union and Single Economic Space due to Entering into Force of the Treaty on Eurasian Economic Union", which were terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 
1 January 2015.  
211.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  according to Article 7 of the EAEU Treaty, 
the EAEU had the right to exercise internatio nal activity aimed at the achievement of the 
objectives of the EAEU.  The EAEU had the right to engage in international relations with states, 
international organizations and international integration associations, and independently or jointly with the member States, conclude agreements on matters corresponding to its competence.  
The procedure on international cooperation of the EAEU had to be established by the decision of 
the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council.  The issu es concerning conclusion of agreements of the 
EAEU with a third party had to be determined by the international treaty within the EAEU. 
(b) Eurasian Economic Union Structure and Competency in the Area of Trade 
212.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at the following bodies were responsible for 
the implementation of the EAEU Treaty an d international treaties within the EAEU: 
- the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council; 
- the Eurasian Intergovernmental Council; 
- the Eurasian Economic Commission (consistin g of the Council and the Collegium); and, 
- the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union. 
(c) The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council  
213.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council 
(hereinafter: the Supreme Council) was the highest level Body of the EAEU, which pursuant to the EAEU Treaty performed the following functions: 
- defined the strategy, directions and perspectives of formation and development of the 
EAEU and took decisions on implementation of objectives of the EAEU; 
- approved the structure of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter: EEC or 
Commission), assigned responsibilities among the members of the EEC Collegium and took 
decisions on termination of their powers; 
- appointed the Chairman of the EEC Collegium and took decisions on pre-term termination 
of his/her powers; 
- approved the rules on procedures of the Commission; -  upon proposal of any member State of th e EAEU, reconsidered decisions adopted by the 
Eurasian Intergovernmental Council or the Commission;   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 52 - 
 
  -  upon proposal of the member States appointed judges of the Court of the Eurasian 
Economic Union (hereinafter: Court of the EAEU); 
-  requested the opinion of the Court of the EAEU; -  approved the budget of the EAEU, regulation  on the budget of the EAEU and report on 
implementation of the budget of the EAEU; 
 -  upon initiative of the Eurasian Intergov ernmental Council or the Commission, considered 
the issues on which consensus was not achieved;  
-  determined the order on admission of new members of the EAEU; 
-  took decisions on granting observer or candidate status on accession to the EAEU;  -  approved the procedure on implementation of international activity of the EAEU;  -  took decisions on negotiations on behalf of the EAEU with third parties, including decisions 
on conclusion of international treaties and granting the right to negotiate as well as on 
expression of consent of the EAEU to be bound  by international treaty with third party,  
termination, suspension or withdrawal from international agreement; and, 
-  performed other functions provided by the EA EU Treaty and international treaties within 
the EAEU. 
The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council made its decisions and gave orders by consensus. 
214.  The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council had to be held at the level of Heads of State.  
Meetings of the Council of Heads of Stat e had to be held at least once a year. 
(d) The Eurasian Intergovernmental Council 
215.  The Eurasian Intergovernmental Council (her einafter: Intergovernmental Council) was the 
body of the EAEU that consisted of the Heads of the Governments of member States of the EAEU.  
Meetings of the Intergovernmental Council were he ld as necessary, but not less than twice a year. 
216.  The Intergovernmental Council performed the following functions: 
- ensured implementation and control of implem entation of the EAEU Treaty, international 
treaties within the EAEU and decisions of the Supreme Council; 
- upon proposal of the Council of the Commission, considered issues on which consensus by 
the Council of the Commission was not achieved; 
- gave instructions to the Commission; - proposed to the Supreme Council candidates to the members of the Council and Collegium 
of the Commission; 
- approved drafts of the budget of the EAEU, regulations on the budget of the EAEU and 
reports on performance of the budget of the EAEU; 
- upon proposal of any EAEU member State, co nsidered issues on reversal or amendment of 
the approved decision of the  Commission or, if not agreed, took them for consideration of 
the Supreme Council; 
- approved decision on suspension of implem entation of decisions of the Council or the 
Collegium of the Commission; and, 
- performed other functions provided by the EA EU Treaty and international treaties within 
the EAEU. 
The Eurasian Intergovernmental Council made its decisions and gave orders by consensus. 
 (e) The Eurasian Economic Commission 
217.  The Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinaft er: EEC or Commission) was the permanent, 
regulatory body of the EAEU.  The Commission was established on the basis of the Treaty on the 
Eurasian Economic Commission of 18 November 2011 and continued its powers under the EAEU 
Treaty. 
218.  The Commission carried out its activities within the competences stipulated in the 
EAEU Treaty, resolutions of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council and international treaties that 
formed the legal framework of the EAEU.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 53 - 
 
  219.  The Commission consisted of the Council and the Collegium.  The Council consisted of one 
representative from each EAEU member State at the level of Deputy Prime Minister.  The Council took decisions by consensus and had the authority to cancel or revise any decisions made by the Collegium.  The Collegium of the Commission consisted of representatives from each 
EAEU member State based on the principle of equa l representation.  The Collegium took decisions 
by qualified majority voting (i.e., two-thirds  of the aggregate membership of the Collegium) or 
by consensus.  Voting took place on all issues or decisions taken by the Collegium.  
220.  The competences of the Council and the Collegium were established by the EAEU Treaty 
and its Annex No. 1 "Regulation on th e Eurasian Economic Commission". 
 (f) The Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission 
221.  The Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter: Council of the Commission 
or EEC Council) carried out general regulation of  integration processes of the EAEU and overall 
management on the Commission 's activities, and performed the following functions: 
- organized the work aimed at enhancing the regulatory framework of the EAEU; 
- submitted proposals on main directions of the integration process within the EAEU to the 
Supreme Council for approval; 
- reviewed issues on revision or amendment of the Commission's decisions taken by the 
Collegium of the Commission; 
- reviewed issues in respect of monitoring and controlling implementation of international 
treaties that constituted the legal framework of the EAEU; 
- performed functions on organization of the Commission's activities;  
- provided instructions to the Collegium of the Commission; and, - performed other functions provided by the EA EU Treaty and international treaties within 
the EAEU. 
 (g) The Collegium of the Eurasian Economic Commission 222.  The Collegium of the Eurasian Economic Co mmission (hereinafter: Collegium of the 
Commission or EEC Collegium) was the executive body of the Commission. The Collegium of the 
Commission provided implementation of the following functions and powers:  
- elaborated proposals and collected proposals from the EAEU member States on further 
integration within the EAEU, including development and implementation of main directions 
of the integration; 
- took decisions, orders and recommendations; - implemented decisions and orders ta ken by the Supreme Council and the 
Intergovernmental Council and decisions taken by the Council of the Commission; 
- ensured monitoring and control on implementation of international treaties constituting the 
legal basis of the EAEU and decisions of  the Commission and informed the EAEU 
member States on necessity of their implementation; 
- annually reported to the Council of the Commission on its work;  -  drafted recommendations on formation, functioning and development of the EAEU; 
-  prepared written expert opinions on proposals of the EAEU member States submitted to 
the Commission; 
- assisted the EAEU member States in resolving disputes within the EAEU before appealing 
to the Court of the EAEU; 
- represented Commission's interests at court instances, including the Court of the EAEU; 
- interacted with public authorities of the EAEU member States within its competence; - considered requests submitted to the Commission; 
- developed drafts of international treaties and decisions of the Commission, taken by the 
Council of the Commission, as well as other documents, necessary for performing functions of the Commission; 
- ensured organization of meetings of the Council of the Commission, the Intergovernmental 
Council and the Supreme Council as well as  subsidiary bodies of the Commission;  
- established consultative bodies within the Collegium of the Commission; and,  - performed functions to organize the Commission's activities. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 54 - 
 
  223.  A Member asked whether the Eurasian Economic Commission had the authority to 
negotiate international agreements and if so, who was the legal person signing and being the 
contact partner for such agreements.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that in accordance with the EAEU Treaty, the Supreme Council took decisions on granting the right to conduct 
negotiations, expressing consent of the EAEU to be bound by international agreements with third 
parties, as well as on termination, suspension or  withdrawal from such agreements.  The decisions 
on granting such mandates were to be taken on a case-by-case basis.   
224.  A Member enquired how the Commission interacted with Kazakhstan's domestic law 
authorities in the following areas:  sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary measures, technical barriers to trade, any other areas where special committees or commissions reporting to the EEC Collegium had been established to administer tr ade-related authorities.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that in the field of technical regulation, sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary 
measures Kazakhstan's national authorities had actively participated in drafting, at that time, of the CU Agreements and, subsequently, the EA EU Treaty and regulations through special 
mechanisms established by legislation of the EAEU.  In particular, the Consultative Committee on 
Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures was a special consultative body that represented a platform for consultations among representatives from 
the EAEU member States.  Within the framework of the Consultative Committee, Kazakhstan's 
relevant authorities participated in preparing proposals on draft regulations on TBT and SPS, including draft technical regulations and conducted examination of legal acts of the EAEU.   
225.  In particular, according to the established pr ocedures, draft technical regulations of the 
EAEU were developed by the EAEU member States.  A member State responsible for the 
development of a draft technical regulation designated a State body responsible for the 
development of the draft technical regulation.  The State body prepared the draft technical 
regulation and, taking into account proposals from the competent authorities of the 
EAEU member States, formed a working group on the development of the draft technical 
regulation.   
226.  In general, all EAEU legal acts on TBT and SP S measures had to be reviewed and approved 
by the relevant national authorities prior to their adoption by the Commission. 
227.  With regard to other areas, according to pa ragraph 44 of Annex No. 1 "Regulation on the 
Eurasian Economic Commission" to the EAEU Treaty, the EEC Collegium had the right to establish 
consultative bodies.  At present, the EEC Collegium had established the following consultative 
bodies: 
- Consultative Committee on Natural Monopoly; 
- Consultative Committee on Transport and Infrastructure; 
- Consultative Committee on Trade; - Consultative Committee on Technical Regulation, Veterinary, Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures; 
- Consultative Committee on Tax Policy and Administration; - Consultative Committee on Customs Regulation; - Consultative Committee on Electric Power; 
- Consultative Committee on Oil and Gas; 
- Consultative Committee on Industry; - Consultative Committee on Agricultural Sector; 
- Consultative Committee on Statistics; 
- Consultative Committee on Macroeconomic Policy; - Consultative Committee on Migration Policy; 
- Consultative Committee on Entrepreneurship; and, 
- Consultative Committee on Intellectual Property. 
Consultative committees prepared proposals to the EEC Collegium and developed drafts of 
agreements and regulations.  Consultative committ ees consisted of representatives of state bodies 
of each EAEU member State and independent experts.  Chairman and Secretary of each 
Committee were the EEC representatives.  Therefore, the member States, through their representatives, participated in the decision making process of the EEC. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 55 - 
 
  228.  Asked whether there would be a common EAEU procurement regime for "State and/or 
municipal procurement", the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the SES Agreement on Government (Municipal) Procurement had granted national treatment for government procurement 
to other member States from 1 January 2014 on a reciprocal basis.  This treatment continued to 
be authorized according to Section XXII "Government (Municipal) Procurement" and Annex No. 25 
"Protocol on Regulation of Procurement" of the EAEU Treaty. 
229.  Concerning the EEC competency on "mutual trade in services and investments" the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that trade in services and investments between the 
EAEU member States were regulated by Section XV "Trade in Services, Establishment, Activity and Investments" and Annex No. 16 "Protocol on Trade in Services, Establishment, Activity and Investments" of the EAEU Treaty.  The main ob jective of these provisions was to promote and 
liberalize trade in services between the EAEU member States, to create common principles and 
rules for mutual trade in services and create a favourable investment climate within the EAEU.  These provisions did not regulate trade in services and investments between the EAEU 
member States and third countries, and did not provide the EEC with the authority to regulate 
services and investments between the EAEU member States or with third countries.  
230.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify the auth ority of the EEC in intellectual property 
protection beyond border control.  The representa tive of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance 
with the EAEU Treaty, the EEC conducted general supervision over the implementation of provisions on intellectual property rights of the EAEU Treaty.  The EAEU Treaty established 
common principles of copyright, trademark and pate nt regulation within the EAEU.  Currently, the 
EEC had not been given any authority in intellectual property protection beyond border control.   
231.  In response to the request to elaborate on the scope of authority of the EEC in "labour 
migration" and in "financial markets (banking, insurance, foreign exchange market, stock 
market)", the representative of Kazakhstan said that relevant provisions could be found in Section 
XXVI "Labour Migration" of the EAEU Treaty.  Th e EAEU Treaty regulated procedures related to 
labour activity of migrant workers and social pr otection of migrant workers (medical assistance 
and social insurance), who were citizens of the EAEU member States.  The EEC was responsible for 
general supervision over the implementation of the provisions of the EAEU Treaty.  The Consultative Committee on Migration Policy was established in order to develop proposals on the establishment of a unified legal regime for empl oyment of citizens of the EAEU member States 
and the formation of a common immigration policy legal framework. 
232.  As for the scope of authority of the EEC in "financial markets (banking, insurance, foreign 
exchange market, stock market)", the representa tive of Kazakhstan explained that relevant 
provisions could be found in Section XIV "Monetary Policy" and Annex No. 15 "Protocol on 
Measures Aimed at Coordinated Monetary Policy" of  the EAEU Treaty.  Under the EAEU Treaty, the 
Commission was not delegated a decision-making authority in the area of fiscal and monetary 
policy within the EAEU.  Decisions regarding poli c i e s  i n  t h i s  a r e a  w e r e  m a d e  b y  e a c h  E A E U  
member State at the national level.  The EAEU member States agreed that the coordination of exchange rate policy would be performed by a separate body, composed of the Heads of the 
National (Central) Banks of the EAEU member St ates.  Article 103 of the EAEU Treaty provided 
that this body would be established in 2025. 
(h) Decision-making within the Bodies of the EAEU 
233.  In accordance with Article 18 and paragraph 13 of Annex No. 1 "Regulation on the 
Eurasian Economic Commission" of the EAEU Treaty, the Commission within its authority took 
decisions mandatory for implementation by the EAEU member States, orders and recommendations.  Decisions of the Commission consisted of decisions made by the EEC Council 
and the EEC Collegium and were included in the legal framework of the EAEU, and were directly 
applicable in the territories of the EAEU member States.  The EEC Council and the EEC Collegium adopted decisions, orders and recommendations of the Commission within their powers.  
234.  In accordance with paragraph 30 of Annex No. 1 "Regulation on the Eurasian Economic 
Commission" to the EAEU Treaty, a member State or member of the EEC Council had the right to 
make a proposal to the EEC Collegium on repealing or amending the decision within 15 calendar days from the date when the decision was adopted by the EEC Collegium. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 56 - 
 
  235.  Upon receipt of all required documents from  the EEC Collegium, the EEC Council had to 
make its decision within 10 calendar days.  A member State that did not agree with the adopted decision of the EEC Collegium could send a letter si gned by the Head of its Government to repeal 
or amend the decision of the EEC Collegium by th e Supreme Council.  This decision could not enter 
into force before its consideration by the Inte rgovernmental Council and/or the Supreme Council. 
(i) The Court of the Eurasian Economic Union 
236.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Me mbers that provisions of the Statute of the 
Court of the Eurasian Economic Union (hereinafter: Court of the EAEU) could be found in Annex 
No. 2 to the EAEU Treaty.  In addition to establishing the Court of the EAEU, the Statute of the Court established the Court's competence and rules of procedure to be applied.  She explained that pursuant to provisions of the Statute, the Court was authorized to:  
- ensure uniform application and interpretation of international treaties within the 
EAEU, international treaties between the EAEU  and third party and decisions taken by the 
bodies of the EAEU;  
- consider disputes arising on implementation of the EAEU Treaty, international treaties 
within the EAEU and/or decisions of the bodies of the EAEU; and,  
- interpret provisions of international treaties in force within the framework of the EAEU. 
237.  In connection with the operation of the EAEU, the Court of the EAEU considered disputes 
regarding implementation of the EAEU Treaty, inte rnational treaties within the EAEU and decisions 
of the bodies of the EAEU: 
1) upon application of a  member State of the EAEU: 
- on compliance of international treaties within the EAEU or their provisions with the EAEU 
Treaty; 
- on compliance by other member States with the EAEU Treaty, international treaties within 
the EAEU and/or decisions of the bodies of the EAEU as well as  specific provisions of those 
international treaties and/or decisions; 
- on compliance of a decision of the Commission  and/or its provisions with the EAEU Treaty, 
international treaties within the EAEU and decisions of the bodies of the EAEU; and, 
- on actions and/or omissions of the Commission. 
2) upon application of  an economic operator: - on compliance of a decision of the Commission and/or its provisions that affected his/her 
rights and legal interests in the sphere of ec onomic activity with the EAEU Treaty and/or 
international treaties within the EAEU; 
- on actions and/or omissions of the Commission affecting his/her rights and legal interests 
in the sphere of economic activity with the EA EU Treaty and/or international treaties within 
the EAEU. 
238.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that if an EAEU member State or the 
Commission did not settle the matter within 3 months, the dispute could then be referred to the 
Court of the EAEU.  By mutual consent of the parties, the dispute could be referred to the Court of the EAEU prior to the expiration of this period. 
239.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized  that the competence of the Court of the 
EAEU was defined by the provisions of Part IV  "Jurisdiction of the Court" of Annex No. 2  "Statute of 
the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union" to th e EAEU Treaty.  The Court of the EAEU did not 
have jurisdiction to opine directly on the member States' WTO obligations and the Court of the 
EAEU could not rule on compliance with such oblig ations.  She also noted that the competence of 
the Court could be enlarged or limited only if it was prescribed directly by an international treaty constituting part of the legal framework of the EAEU.  The Treaty on the Functioning of the 
Customs Union in the Framework of the Multilat eral Trading System of 19 May 2011 was such a 
Treaty.  Since this Treaty was part of the lega l framework of the EAEU, an infringement by an 
EAEU member State, by the Supreme Council or by  the EEC of such rights and obligations under 
the Treaty to the extent that they were part  of the legal framework of the EAEU could be WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 57 - 
 
  challenged by an EAEU member State before the Co urt of the EAEU in accordance with the Court's 
Statute.  In addition, economic operators could assert breaches of the provisions of the above-
mentioned Treaty in the Court of the EAEU. 
240.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Statute of the Court of the EAEU also 
authorized the Court to issue clarifications on th e EAEU Treaty, the provisions of the international 
treaties within the EAEU, as well as decisions of  the bodies of the EAEU.  Such opinions were 
issued at the request of EAEU member States or the bodies of the EAEU, and were in the form of 
advisory opinions that did not prevent the me mber States from providing their own joint 
interpretations.   
241.  With regard to who could apply to the Court of the EAEU to hear a case, the representative 
of Kazakhstan explained that with regard to cases involving the EAEU, cases could be brought 
before the Court based on the application submitted by: 
- EAEU member States; 
- economic operators. 
242.  Under the EAEU Treaty, economic operators of the EAEU member States and of third 
countries were able to bring actions to the Court of the EAEU to:  
- challenge decisions of the Commission in the sphere of economic activity if such decisions 
affected their rights and legal interests under the EAEU Treaty and/or international treaties 
within the EAEU; and,  
- challenge the actions and/or omissions of the EEC in the sphere of economic activity if 
such actions and/or omissions affect their righ ts and legal interests under the EAEU Treaty 
and/or international treaties within the EAEU.  
243.  The grounds to challenge acts of the EEC, or their individual provisions, or any action 
and/or omission of the EEC were their non-compliance with international treaties concluded within 
the framework of the EAEU, which resulted in the violation of the rights and lawful interests of 
economic operators in the field of entrepreneurial and other economic activities, provided for by those international treaties.  She further explaine d that the Court of the EAEU would not consider 
applications to bring an action, if the decision of the Court on a previously considered case 
regarding the same subject and based on the same grounds was in effect.  A decision of the Court could be reviewed due to newly discovered circumstances.  
244.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that, the EAEU member States had 
created an Appeals Chamber within the Court of th e EAEU.  A party to the case had the right to 
appeal the decision of a panel of judges to the Appeals Chamber of the Court.  The Appeals Chamber consisted of judges of the Court from the member States, which had not participated in 
the panel that had taken the decision that was being appealed.  The decision of the Appeals 
Chamber was the final decision in the case and could not be appealed.   
245.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, with regard to disputes of an economic 
nature arising between the EAEU member States on  the implementation of decisions of the bodies 
of the EAEU, treaty provisions in force in the fr amework of the EAEU, and cases in connection with 
the EAEU, the decisions of the Court were binding on  the Parties to the dispute.  The decision of a 
panel of judges, if not appealed, entered into forc e 15 days after the date of its pronouncement.  
Decisions of the Appeals Chamber were effective on the date of pronouncement.  If the decision of 
the Court was not implemented within the time-fra me specified by the Court, any EAEU member 
State Party to the case could apply to the Supr eme Council for a decision on implementation.  
In cases involving an economic operator where th e EEC failed to implement the decision of the 
Court of the EAEU, the economic operator had the right to file an application to the Court on introduction of measures on the execution of the said decision.  The Court was obliged, within 
15 days from receipt of the application from the economic operator, to address the Supreme 
Council with a request to take a decision on the issue. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 58 - 
 
  (j) Transparency 
246.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that proposals for the introduction, 
amendment or elimination of a measure were prep ared by the interested EAEU member State in 
accordance with its national legislation.  This member State consulted with interested stakeholders 
on the proposal, as provided for in its applicable national legislation.  She also informed Members 
that such proposals by another member State, once submitted to Kazakhstan for consideration, would be promptly made subject to public consulta tions in the same way as proposals prepared by 
Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third 
Countries" to the EAEU Treaty, participants of fo reign activity of the member States could also 
provide their proposals and comments within the pr ocedure of the development of draft Decision 
of the Commission on introduction, implementation or withdrawal of a non-tariff measure 
concerning trade in goods with third countries.  Furthermore, interested persons could also 
participate in consultations and be informed on the results according to the procedures and forms defined by the Commission.    
247.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the date when a Decision of the 
EAEU bodies was published on the EAEU website was the basis for determining the date of entry 
into force of that decision.  Specifically, Decisi ons of the EEC, rather than recommendations, as a 
general rule, entered into force not earlier than  30 days after the date of publication on the 
EAEU website. Decisions of the EEC were post ed on the website www.eu rasiancommission.org 
within two working days from the date of their adoption.   
248.  Members expressed concerns regarding transparency, and also noted that it appeared that 
neither international agreements within the EAEU, nor EEC Decisions, including those promulgating 
Regulations and other acts, provided WTO Member s and interested persons of WTO Members with 
the right to consult with and provide views directly  to the EEC.  This deficiency raised concerns 
about whether international agreements within the EAEU and procedures complied with WTO 
requirements.  These Members requested that Kaza khstan explain how it intended to implement 
its commitments under Section "Transparency" of this Report in cases where the EEC was 
responsible for proposing or adopting legal ac ts, including decisions, or other measures. 
249.  With regard to concerns raised by Members about transparency and access to the EEC, the 
representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that nothing precluded WTO Members from providing comments directly to the EEC.  She note d that Kazakhstan invited views from Members 
on proposals that it was presenting to the EEC. 
250.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Commission Decision No. 308 
"Decision-Making at the Commission of the Customs Union" of 18 June 2010 had been amended to 
establish and put into effect a mechanism for publication of proposed EAEU legal acts covered 
under paragraph 1141 of Section "Transparency" of  this Report before their adoption and to 
provide a reasonable period of time for Members and interested persons to provide comments to 
the competent EAEU body, which was authorized to take these comments into account in its 
consideration of the proposed legal act.  Moreover , from the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO, pursuant to this mechanism, no EAEU legal act covered under paragraph 1146 of Section "Transparency" of this Report would become effect ive prior to publication as provided for in the 
applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.  
(k) Implementation of WTO Commitments under the EAEU Regime 
251.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the EAEU member States had concluded 
the Treaty on the Functioning of the Customs Union in the Framework of the Multilateral Trading 
System of 19 May 2011 (hereinafter: Treaty on the Multilateral System).  This interstate Treaty had entered into force in accordance with the provis ions of the Protocol "On the Rules of Entry into 
Force of International Treaties Comprising the Le gal Basis of the Customs Union, Withdrawal from 
Them and Accession to Them" of 6 October 2007, and continued to be in effect under the EAEU Treaty.  According to the Treaty on the Multilat eral System, from the date of accession of any 
EAEU member State to the WTO, the provisions of the WTO Agreement, as set-out in its Protocol 
of Accession, including the commitments undertaken by  that member State as part of the terms of 
its accession to the WTO, which related to matters that the member States had authorized the EAEU bodies to regulate in the framework of th e EAEU, as well as to the legal relationships WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 59 - 
 
  regulated by the international treaties constituti ng the legal framework of the EAEU, became an 
integral part of the legal framework of the EAEU.  As such, these provisions were part of the single undertaking and were international agreements within the EAEU that were part of the single undertaking for each member State.  Under the Treaty on the Multilateral System, EAEU 
member States were obligated when making an in ternational treaty in the framework of the EAEU 
to ensure that such EAEU treaty or agreement was consistent with the WTO commitments of each 
EAEU member State.  Similarly, when EAEU bodi es adopted and applied EAEU acts, those acts had 
to comply with those commitments.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the 
rights and obligations of the member States resulting from the WTO Agreement, as they were set out in the Protocol of Accession of each member State, including the commitments undertaken by each member State as part of the terms of its accession to the WTO and that became a part of the 
legal framework of the EAEU, could not be subject to  abrogation or limitation by decision of the 
EAEU bodies, including the Court of  the EAEU or by an international treaty of the member States.  
When another EAEU member State became a WTO Member, the rights and obligations of that 
member State under the WTO Agreement also became an integral part of the legal framework of 
the EAEU.  She explained that WTO provisions wh ich regulated the creation and functioning of 
customs unions also applied.  She noted that an EAEU member State that was not a WTO Member 
could deviate from provisions of the WTO Agreement in certain cases.  When that member State 
became a WTO Member, however, any deviation from the WTO Agreement would be allowed only as specifically provided for in the terms of accession to the WTO of that member State.  Finally, the EAEU member States were required to adopt measures to adjust the EAEU legal framework 
and decisions of the EAEU bodies to comply with the WTO Agreement as set-out in the Protocol of 
Accession of each member State.  Until those measures were adopted, other EAEU treaties and decisions of the EAEU bodies would apply only  to the extent that they complied with the 
WTO Agreement.  Thus, the rights and obliga tions of an EAEU member State under the 
WTO Agreement would override prior and future EA EU treaties and agreements and decisions of 
the EAEU bodies.  
252.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  the Treaty on the Multilateral System was 
an EAEU treaty and part of the domestic legal fr amework of each EAEU member State.  As such, 
the national courts would apply the provisions of the Treaty.  She also confirmed that the Treaty on the Multilateral System established obligations on the EAEU member States and the Supreme 
Council and the EEC regarding the commitments undertaken by each member State as part of the 
terms of its accession to the WTO and became part  of the legal framework of the EAEU.  Thus, an 
infringement of such rights and obligations by an EAEU member State or the Supreme Council or 
the EEC could be challenged by an EAEU member St ate, or the EEC before the Court of the EAEU.  
In addition, economic operators could assert breaches of the provisions of the Treaty on the Multilateral System in the Court of the EAEU, as provided for in provisions of the Statute of the 
Court and in the Treaty on Judicial Recourse of 9 October 2010.  
- Government Entities Responsible for Ma king and Implementing Policies Affecting 
Foreign Trade; Right of Appeal 
253.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that the Court of the EAEU and the 
national judicial system of the Republic of Kazakh stan were independent.  The Statute of the Court 
of the EAEU provided that the highest judicial  authority of the Republic of Kazakhstan was 
authorized to apply to the Court of the EAEU for an opinion on interpretation of certain 
international treaties.  The Court of the EAEU, however, did not serve as an appeals court for the 
national judicial system.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with the Statute of the Court of the EAEU, the national Supreme Court of an EAEU member State could ask 
the Court of the EAEU to provide an advisory opin ion in respect of implementation of EAEU legal 
acts.  Subsequently, the national Supreme Court could reflect this opinion in a normative resolution, which would be taken into account by all lower national courts. 
254.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  Decision of the Interstate Council of the 
Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) at the level of Heads of State No. 16 of 
27 November 2009 had established the Experts Counc il of the Supreme Body of the CU or the 
EAEU as of 1 January 2015, and had also adopte d regulations on the operation of the Experts 
Council.  Interstate Council Decision No. 69 of 9 December 2010 had appointed the members of 
the Experts Council.  Economic operators could apply to the Experts Council for an opinion on whether an EEC Decision complied with an international treaty that was part of the legal 
framework of the EAEU.  If the Experts Council acce pted an application, a Conciliation Commission WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 60 - 
 
  was formed to examine the issue and to provid e an opinion to the EEC on whether the EEC 
Decision conformed with the legal basis of the EAEU and, if the Decision did not conform, 
recommendations on revising the EEC Decision.  The EEC was required to inform the Supreme Council of the opinion of the Experts Council and the results of the consideration by the EEC of that 
opinion. 
255.  Some Members enquired about the administrati ve and judicial channels for appeal of 
administrative decisions made on WTO-related issues, namely, how importers and exporters could 
appeal: (i) customs and other WTO-related decisions within administrative channels; and, 
(ii) administrative rulings to a court or other "ind ependent tribunal" as provided for in Article X of 
the GATT 1994.   
256.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan applied the Treaty on the 
Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 (hereinafter: CU Customs Code) that 
had entered into force as of 1 July 2010.  Acco rding to Article 9 of the CU Customs Code, any 
person had the right to appeal against decisions made by the customs bodies, action and/or 
inaction of the customs bodies and their officials.  At the same time, such persons had to appeal in 
accordance with the national legislation of the co untry where the customs body or an official made 
a decision.  Thus, in accordance with Article 12 of Law of Kazakhstan No. 221-III "On Order of 
Review of Requests of Natural and Juridical Pe rsons" of 12 January 2007, natural and juridical 
persons had the right to appeal against actions and/or inactions of the customs officials and decisions made by the customs bodies to a senior official or higher-level body no later than three months from the moment a natural or juridical person learned about an action or decision made by 
the relevant customs body or an official.  In case there was no senior official or an appellant did 
not agree with the decision, an appellant could appeal to the court in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure of Kazakhstan No. 411-I of 13 July 1999 (hereinafter: Code of Civil Procedure).  
Article 278 of the Code of Civil Procedure defi ned the common judicial procedure for appeals, 
including administrative appeals, as well as for special proceedings.  According to Article 280 of the Code of Civil Procedure, natural and juridical pers ons had the right to appeal to the court within 
three months from the date when it had become known that their rights, freedoms and interests 
protected by law, were abused.  Besides, in both ca ses, a failure of a natural or juridical person to 
submit an application for appeal within the stated term of three months could not constitute a ground for rejecting an application.  The reason for failure to submit an application within the term 
of three months had to be investigated when considering a complaint and could be one of the 
grounds for rejection of the complaint.  The review of judicial decisions of rayon (district), oblast (regional) and other local courts made at first instance was carried out through an 
appeal/supervision procedure.  Prior appeal to higher bodies did not constitute a mandatory 
precondition for a direct appeal to the courts.  Irrespective of whether or not they participated in the hearing, the Prosecutor-General, rayon, oblast and other public prosecutors of equal stature, 
as well as their deputies, had the right to appeal against court judgments which had not yet come 
into force (other than judgments of the Supreme Court).  Parties to a case, as well as other parties affected by the decision, could also appeal against such decision.  Appeals had to be made within one month of the date of infringement and heard no  later than one month from the date of receipt 
of the appeal by the court of first instance.  The court of appeal was authorized to make new 
findings of facts within the limits of the claim and investigate new evidence, which, for valid reasons, had not been presented at first instance .  Court decisions, rulings, decrees and orders, 
which had already come into force, could be re viewed and appealed within a year, on grounds 
stipulated in the Code of Civil Procedure (e.g., discovery of new facts), in line with the judicial supervision procedure.  Reviews of decisions made by the supervisory board of the Supreme 
Court, and a second review of the case by the su pervisory board of the Supreme Court, were also 
allowed in certain cases.   
257.  As regards appeals and complaints in the sphere of technical regulation, including 
SPS issues, the representative of Kazakhstan  explained that, under the EAEU, there was a 
common system of technical regulations, including SPS matters, and thus the Court of the EAEU 
had jurisdiction over appeals covered by the rele vant EAEU agreements, EEC Decisions, including 
those promulgating EAEU regulations and other EAEU measures.  With regard to decisions, actions 
or inactions of the authorized bodies of the Republ ic of Kazakhstan, related to technical regulation, 
including SPS issues, she explained that legal measures were in place to allow appeals to be made via the independent judicial system against any decisions of the relevant authorities of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and to ensure corrective action was taken, in accordance with decisions of 
the court, when a complaint was justified.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 61 - 
 
  IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS 
- Registration Requirements for Import and Export Operations 258.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the right of all domestic and foreign natural 
and juridical persons to carry out foreign trade activity in Kazakhstan, and any exceptions or 
restrictions upon those rights, were stipulated in the Eurasian Economic Union Treaty (EAEU 
Treaty), decisions of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter: EEC or Commission), other EAEU legal acts and national legislation.  In gene ral terms, Article 2 of Civil Code of Kazakhstan 
(General Part) No. 269-XII of 27 December 1994 provided that goods, services and capital moved 
on a free basis within the territory of Kazakh stan, and Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter:  Customs Code of Kazakhstan) elaborated on that mandate.  She stated that from 1 January 2015, 
as a result of the entry into force of the EAEU  Treaty, the principal requirements for importing 
goods into and exporting goods from Kazakhst an were based on Annex No. 7 "Protocol on 
Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third Countries" to the EAEU Treaty which replaced the provisions 
of the following Customs Union (CU) Agreem ents: the Agreement "On Common Measures of 
Non-tariff Regulation in Respect of Third Countries" of 25 January 2008, the Agreement "On the Introduction and Implementation of Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods, on the 
Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries" of 9 June 2009, the Agreement 
"On Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise Trade" of 9 June 2009 which were terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  The following Decisions remained in force: Decision of the CU Commission No. 132 "On Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs 
Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 
27 November 2009 (hereinafter: CU Decision No . 132) and Decision of the Collegium of the 
Commission No. 134 "On Normative Legislative Acts in the Area of Non-Tariff Regulation" of 
16 August 2012 (hereinafter: Collegium Decision No. 134).  The procedure for the importation of 
specific products, such as ethyl spirits and alcohol products, products with cryptographic capabilities (encryption products), and medicines and pharmaceutical ingredients, were set-out in 
Regulations of the CU Commission approved by CU Decision No. 132 and re-approved by 
Collegium Decision No. 134.  Specific Sections of this Report relating to the import and export 
regimes of Kazakhstan provided descriptions of  the provisions of the EAEU Treaty, Commission 
Decisions and other EAEU legal acts, including requirements for non-automatic import or export 
licenses and/or automatic licenses (permits).  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, 
from 1 January 2015, pursuant to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, these Decisions and Regulations, the authorized body of each EA EU member State was responsible for issuing 
non-automatic import and export licenses and/or automatic licenses (permits), as well as activity 
licenses.   
259.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that only declarants (importers/ exporters), or 
their representatives registered for that purpose, could perform the customs activities associated 
with the importation or exportation of goods (pre senting customs documents, declaring origin and 
valuation, paying tariffs and taxes, securing re lease of the goods, righ t of appeal, etc.).  
The requirements and rights of declarants (impor ters/exporters) were regulated by the Treaty on 
the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 (hereinafter: CU Customs Code) 
and the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  Pursuant to Article 284 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, as well as Article 186 of the CU Cust oms Code, the declarant had to be a natural or a 
juridical person of one of the EAEU member States who either had a contract for importation or 
exportation (or had had the contract concluded on his/her behalf) or owned the goods being imported or exported.  The requirements for a person  or an entity to register as a juridical person 
of Kazakhstan were provided in Law No. 2198 "On State Registration of Juridical Persons and 
Statistical Record-Keeping Registration of Bran ches and Representative Offices" of 17 April 1995 
(hereinafter: Law No. 2198), Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005 (hereinafter: Law No. 57-III), Budget Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 95-IV  
of 4 December 2008 (hereinafter: Budget Code of Kazakhstan) and Code of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV 
"On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to th e Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 
(hereinafter: Tax Code).   
260.  A Member raised concerns about the ability of natural and juridical persons located outside 
Kazakhstan to act as a declarant (importer of record) when importing goods into Kazakhstan.  This Member noted, in particular, that Kazakhstan's regime did not appear to permit such natural 
and juridical persons to serve as a declarant (importer of record) so as to be responsible for WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 62 - 
 
  clearing all customs formalities in connection with their imports.  This Member asked Kazakhstan 
what steps it would take to provide such rights.  
261.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at Articles 186-194 of the CU Customs Code 
set forth the requirements for persons to import goods into the customs territory of the EAEU and 
perform all necessary customs procedures, including payment of customs duties and charges.  
Article 186 of the CU Customs Code provided that only a juridical person of an EAEU member State could become a declarant.  Therefore, a subsidiary  of a foreign company registered as a juridical 
person of Kazakhstan could become a declarant.  However, a foreign natural person could act as a 
declarant of goods for personal use without registering as a juridical person of Kazakhstan. 
262.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at requirements for actual registration of 
natural and juridical persons for commercial acti vities, including importing and exporting, were 
strictly a matter of the national legislation of each EAEU member State and this situation was not 
expected to change.  She emphasized that the re quirement to be registered in Kazakhstan was 
necessary to ensure proper implementation of customs legislation, including its provisions on 
conditional release of goods into the territory of Kazakhstan and post-entry control that permitted 
accelerated customs procedures at the entry and destination customs checkpoints.   
263.  Concerning registration requirements, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
pursuant to Article 3 of Law No. 2198, State registration was mandatory for all juridical persons 
established on the territory of Kazakhstan regardle ss of the purpose and type of their activities.  
Registration was necessary for:  (i) certifying and keeping a record on establishment, reorganization and liquidation of juridical persons, branches and representative offices; (ii) keeping 
the single State register of juridical persons, an d record of branches and representative offices; 
and, (iii) dissemination of the data on juridica l persons, branches and representative offices 
registered in Kazakhstan (other than confidential information and commercial secrets) in the order 
established by the national legislation.   
264.  Pursuant to Article 9 of Law No. 2198, State registration of small businesses, as well as 
medium and large-scale enterprises operating on the basis of a Model Charter, was performed 
within one working day and their re-registration within three working days from the date of 
submission of a complete set of application documents.  State registration (re-registration) of medium and large-scale enterprises not operating under a Model Charter was performed within seven working days from the date of submission of a complete set of application documents.  
According to Article 6 of Law No. 2198, to apply for registration, juridical persons had to submit 
three copies of the following documents:  (i) standard application; (ii) articles of incorporation (charter); (iii) proof of payment of the registration fee; (iv) document certifying location/address 
of its office or its agent's office; and, (v) for juridical persons established as a result of 
restructuring, the act of transfer, including pr oof that creditors had been notified about the 
restructuring.  In response to a specific question , the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
pursuant to Article 6 of Law No. 2198, either of the following documents was recognized as a 
document certifying location/address of a juridical person:  a notarized copy of (i) a leasing contract, (ii) a sales contract, or, (iii) other documents confirming the property right.  If the owner of the leased office was a natural person, a notarized document confirming consent of the natural 
person for the use of the office as a place of locati on of the juridical person had to be presented.  
She noted that pursuant to Law No. 60-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative A c t s  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  o n  I s s u e s  of State Registration of Juridical Persons and 
Statistical Record-Keeping Registration of Branches and Representative Offices" of 
24 December 2012, state registration of all commercial juridical persons, except for joint stock companies, was performed within one working da y.  Furthermore, article of incorporation 
(charter), except for joint stock companies (article of incorporation (charter) was required), and 
document certifying location/address of its office or its agent's office were no longer required for state registration as a juridical person. 
265.  In addition to submitting the documents de scribed above, and unless otherwise provided 
by international treaties, juridical persons of Kazakhstan with foreign participation had to submit:  
(i) a notarized and consularized (legalized) document certifying that the applicant was established in accordance with the legislation of the foreign country, accompanied by a notarized translation in 
Kazakh and Russian languages; and, (ii) a copy  of the identification papers of the person 
registering the company (e.g., passport, identification card or residency permit), accompanied by a notarized translation in Kazakh and Russian lang uages.  These requirements applied in a uniform WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 63 - 
 
  manner to all juridical persons with foreign participation and did not constitute actual 
discrimination against them.  
266.  Registration could only be refused for la ck of compliance of the company's founding 
documents with Kazakhstan's legislation and breaching the legal rules on the establishment of 
juridical persons.  The basis for refusal of regist ration (re-registration) was provided in Article 11 
of Law No. 2198.  Refusals were communicated in writing within 10 working days, with a reference to the underlying reasons, and could be appealed to the courts.   
267.  Pursuant to Law No. 537-II "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of State Re gistration of Juridical Persons" of 18 March 2004, 
juridical persons, their branches and representative offices, obtained all certificates from the justice authorities on the basis of the "one-stop- shop" principle.  These certificates included a 
State registration certificate, a taxpayer registration certificate and a statistical certificate of 
registration in the State statistical register.  Registration certificates were issued for an unlimited period and a single registration was valid on the entire territory of Kazakhstan.  A registration 
certificate would be replaced only at re-registration or when there had been a change in location.  
A table summarizing the requirements for registrati on of juridical persons, including the duration 
of the procedure and applicable fees, is provided in Annex 5(A) of this Report. 
268.  Some Members raised concerns about the requirement for re-registration and duplicate 
registration, since this requirement would amount to an ad valorem  fee that appeared to place an 
extra burden on foreign businesses/entities.  These Members asked Kazakhstan to confirm that it would bring its registration fees into conformity with the requirements of Article VIII of the GATT 
1994 prior to WTO accession, given that commercial registration was a requirement to import or 
export goods other than for personal use in Kazakhstan.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to the "Methodology for Calculation of Fees and Fees for State 
Registration of Juridical Persons" approved by  Order of the Ministry of Economy and Budget 
Planning No. 135 of 28 October 2005, registration fees for juridical persons, including small businesses, reflected the cost of services rendered.  The same criteria were applied to the 
calculation of fees for activity licenses necessary for importation or exportation.  Fees for State 
registration of juridical persons were calculated based on the Monthly Calculation Index (MCI) defined by the Tax Code.  The registration fee for small businesses was set at 2 MCIs (approximately US$20 in 2014); the rate for other juridical persons was 6.5 MCIs (approximately 
US$65 in 2014).  This difference was caused by the different level of costs/resources involved.  
Less time and resources were required for the assessment of a registration for small businesses due to the lesser number of documents required for the registration of small businesses.  
Therefore, the cost of services rendered was le ss than for the registration of other juridical 
persons.  All registration fees were applie d uniformly on the territory of Kazakhstan.  
The methodology for the calculation of fees is provided in Annex 5(B) of this Report.   
269.  A Member noted the substantial difference between the time required for registration of 
small businesses and other juridical persons and encouraged Kazakhstan to implement further reform so that the turn-around time for registration applications was equal for all business entities.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that simplified State registration procedures 
applied to small businesses, including a reduced li st of documents required for registration, and, 
consequently, a shorter registration period and smaller registration fee.  These simplified procedures were based on the fact that all such enterprises operated on the basis of a simplified 
Model Charter.  To date, her Government had not received any complaint on these procedures.  
These preferential terms for small businesses were part of the Government's broader efforts aimed 
at addressing the strategic goal of reducing po verty and social disparity, and strengthening the 
middle class, a policy goal shared by other countries that provided special help to the formation 
and development of small businesses.  She held the view that these policy measures were applied on a non-discriminatory basis to both domestic and foreign entities and natural persons applying for registration and as such, did not, in her view, contradict WTO norms.  She further recalled that 
pursuant to Law No. 60-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of State Registration of Juridical Persons and Statistical Record-Keeping Registration of Branches and Repres entative Offices" of 24 December 2012, State 
registration of all commercial juridical persons, except for joint stock companies, was performed 
within one working day. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 64 - 
 
  270.  In response to another question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan 
explained that an "authorized economic operator" was a juridical person of an EAEU member State that met certain conditions, set forth in Article 39 of the CU Customs Code and Chapter 6 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, including provision of a guarantee for the payment of customs 
duties and taxes, a history of engaging in fore ign economic activity, the absence of unfulfilled 
obligations or debts to the customs authority, the absence of administrative offences in the year prior to the application date, the availability of sufficient record-keeping procedures, and 
compliance with other relevant requirements of the EAEU member State, in this case, Kazakhstan, 
under which the juridical person was established.  According to Article 41 of the CU Customs Code and Article 65 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, an authorized economic operator enjoyed simplified and expedited customs procedures, including those concerning goods in transit.  
Authorized economic operator status and access to simplified procedures applied only in the 
territory of the EAEU member State, which granted that status.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
also noted that an authorized economic operator co uld use simplified procedures provided that this 
operator had the right to act as the declarant of goods, towards which such special simplifications 
were applied. 
271.  A Member asked the representative of Kaza khstan whether a firm or an enterprise 
registered in Kazakhstan was considered a "resident" for the purposes of preferential trade with 
other CIS countries.  This Member asked Kazakhstan to provide a clear distinction between juridical personhood in Kazakhstan through registration and being a "resident".  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that when a ratified international agreement did not contain a definition of 
the term "resident" for the purposes of the give n agreement, the "residency" status was regulated 
by the provisions of the Budget Code, Law No. 57- III and the Tax Code.  According to these legal 
acts, companies were eligible to benefit from preferential trade under free trade agreements, 
including among the CIS, if they were register ed in Kazakhstan as resident tax payers.   
272.  Several Members noted that laws and regulations relating to the right to trade in goods, 
"registration requirements" or "activity licensing" had not to be more burdensome than necessary 
and, thus, restrict imports in violation of the general prohibition on quantitative restrictions under 
Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994, nor should they discriminate against imported goods in violation of the provisions of Article III:4 of the GATT 1994.  Furthermore, fees and charges levied on the right 
to import had to be limited to the cost of services rendered as under Article VIII:1(a) and 
Article VIII:4(c) of the GATT 1994, and internal taxes or other internal charges on the right to 
trade in imported goods had not to lead to discrimination in favour of like domestic products as required by Article III:2 of the GATT 1994.   
273.  Members also asked Kazakhstan to confirm that foreign juridical persons could be the 
"importer and exporter of record" and that fore ign importers and exporters could legally sign 
import/export contracts with foreign entities with a physical presence in Kazakhstan.  In reply, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that foreign juridical persons who registered their 
commercial presence in the form of juridical persons of Kazakhstan could be the importer and exporter of record, and such importers and expo rters could legally sign import/export contracts 
with foreign entities and act as declarants for the purposes of importation and exportation.   
274.  In response to further questions from Member s, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that the Government, in respect of measures a ffecting trade in goods with other WTO Members, 
would continue its policy of maintaining an expeditious registration process, and applying 
transparent and predictable requirements that were  not burdensome to satisfy.  She added that 
Kazakhstan would not apply registration requiremen ts to limit the possibility for juridical persons 
to engage in importing and exporting, and that once  registered in the form of juridical persons of 
Kazakhstan, they could import or export products as described in this Report.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would not make the procedures or overall requirements to register as a juridical person more burdensome than necessary, would not discriminate between foreign and domestic applicants in approving requests for registration, would not apply procedures 
and requirements in a restrictive manner and would also comply with other applicable provisions of 
the WTO Agreement including transparency obligat ions.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 65 - 
 
  - (a) Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products 
275.  Some Members expressed concern over the restrictive consequences of the activity 
licensing system for the sale of alcoholic bevera ges.  They requested information on the current 
legislation and Kazakhstan's intention to introduce new legislation in this area.  In particular, these 
Members sought information on the activity licensing fees charged for the right to import alcoholic 
beverages and on any plans for establishment of a State monopoly on alcoholic beverages. 
276.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that pursuant to Law No. 461-IV 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues 
of Improvement of Permission System" of 15 July 2011, amending Law No. 214-III "On Licensing" 
of 11 January 2007 (hereinafter: Law "On Licensing"), the requirement for an activity licence for importation of ethyl spirits and alcohol products, which was used as a condition for obtaining an 
import licence for ethyl spirits and alcohol products, had been eliminated as of 30 January 2012.  
She noted, however, that importers into Kazakhstan of ethyl spirits and alcohol products were still required to have an activity licence for production, distribution, or storage of ethyl spirits and 
alcohol products, and to obtain and apply strip stamps for the purposes of excise tax payments, as 
described in Section "Application of Internal Taxes to Import" of this Report.   
277.  In addition, in accordance with CU Commission Decision No. 747 "On Amendments to 
Normative Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Non-tariff Regulation in Relation to 
Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products" of 16 August 2011, upon accession of any EAEU member State to the WTO, non-automatic import licensing requirements to ethyl spirits and alcohol products would be eliminated and replaced by an automatic licensing requirement.  As a consequence, 
existing domestic legislation requiring non-automatic import licensing for these products would be 
amended accordingly, including:  Law No. 429-I "O n State Regulation of Production and Turnover 
of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products" of 16 July  1999 (hereinafter: Law "On Regulation of Ethyl 
Spirits and Alcohol Products").  With the aim to eliminate import licence of ethyl spirits and alcohol 
products from the List of Goods Subject to Export  and Import Licensing, the Rules on Export and 
Import Licensing, including Licensing of Goods Subject to Export Controls, and the Rules on 
Automatic Import Licensing of Certain Goods, Qualification Requirements for Licensed Activities 
and Approval of the List of Goods Subject to Expo rt and Import Licensing, approved by Resolution 
of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 578 "On Cert ain Issues on Export and Import Licensing of 
Goods" of 12 June 2008, had been amended by Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan 
No. 1320 of 17 October 2012. 
278.  In response to a question from a Member, th e representative of Kazakhstan said that 
according to Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 57 "On Certain Issues of Activity 
Licensing for Production of Ethyl Spirits and Production, Storage, Wholesale and/or Retail Sale of 
Alcohol Products Except for Storage, Wholesale and/or Retail Sale of Alcohol Products within the Territory of Production" of 29 January 2013, the prerequisites for obtaining an activity licence for 
storage and distribution of alcohol products incl uded the requirement that the applicant had to 
either own or lease specialized premises for storag e and distribution of alcohol products, provided 
that they complied with qualification requirements.  In this case, the applicant had to submit a copy of the sales or leasing contract.  
279.  A Member asked whether importers of non-food products containing denatured alcohol, 
e.g., cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, pain ts and stains, etc. were required to obtain an 
activity licence for the "manufacture of alcohol products", the "storage, wholesale and/or retail sale 
of alcohol products", and the "import of ethyl alco hol and alcohol products".  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that the terms "manufacture of alcohol products", "storage, wholesale and/or retail sale of alcohol products" (found in Article 36 of Law "On Licensing") did not include non-food 
products containing denatured alcohol, e.g., cosm etics, fragrances, cleaning products, paints and 
stains, etc.  Pursuant to Law "On Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products", the term "alcohol product" was defined as a food produc t  w i t h  a l c o h o l  b y  v o l u m e  o f  m o r e  t h a n  1 . 5 %  
produced with the use of ethyl spirits from food raw material and/or alcohol-containing food 
product, except for those of medical purposes registered as medicine in accordance with the 
legislation of Kazakhstan.  Law "On Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products" and EAEU legal acts did not regulate the importation of non- food products containing denatured alcohol, such 
as cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, paints and stains, etc.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 66 - 
 
  - (b) Pharmaceuticals 
280.  A Member asked if the requirement for an ac tivity licence to perform "pharmaceutical 
activities:  production, manufacture, wholesale and retail sale of medical preparations" included the act of importation only without the right to distribute in Kazakhstan.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that activity licensing in respect of pharmaceuticals, including veterinary drugs, 
was maintained on production and distribution of  pharmaceuticals because of potential damage of 
such activities to human or animal life and health.  Pursuant to Article 80 of Code of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On People's Health and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009, the 
right to import pharmaceuticals, including veterinary drugs, was granted to the following Kazakhstan entities, including foreign-invested enterprises, registered as a juridical person of Kazakhstan:  
- producers holding an activity licence for production;  
- enterprises holding an activity licence for wholesale of pharmaceuticals;  - R&D organizations and laboratories import ing pharmaceuticals for the purposes of 
development and State registration of the pharmaceuticals;  
- foreign producers or their authorized representatives for the purposes of conducting 
clinical trials, State registration and exhibitions; and, 
- medical organizations for provision of medical services.  
More detailed information regarding registration and import licensing procedures for 
pharmaceuticals, including veterinary drugs, could be found in Chapter IV "Policies Affecting Trade 
in Goods", Section A "Import Regulations", Subsec tion (b) "Import Licensing" of this Report. 
- (c) Products containing cryptograp hic capabilities, including goods   
  with encryption technology  and special technical devices 
281.  Some Members noted that Kazakhstan required an  activity licence to engage in production 
or distribution of goods with encryption technolo gy, and required that applicants for a licence to 
import certain goods with encryption technology also  had an activity licence.  In the opinion of a 
Working Party Member, an activity licence requirement imposed by Kazakhstan as a condition for 
importation or exportation of encryption products, as opposed to domestic distribution, constituted 
an unnecessary impediment to the right to import and export.  The Working Party Member asked how Kazakhstan would bring its import licensing regime for encryption products into conformity with WTO requirements.  Working Party Members also asked for assurances that the requirement 
to have an activity licence as a condition for obtaining an import licence, i.e., simply to import 
such goods, would not be applied as an unjustifiable restriction on imports.   
282.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that the term "distribution" in this 
case did not include the term "import".  Under Law "On Licensing", production and domestic 
distribution of encryption products were licensed activities in Kazakhstan, and an activity licence for production or distribution of encryption produc ts was required to import encryption products.   
283.  The representative of Kazakhstan recalled the se nsitivity of the goods that were subject to 
the import licensing requirement, and noted that many WTO Members regulated trade in encryption goods.  She added that no discrimination against imports was intended by this licensing system.  Moreover, the representative of Kazakhst an explained that pursuant to the Regulation 
"On the Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and Removal from the 
Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Encryption (Cryptographic) Means" approved by Collegium Decision No. 134 (hereinafter: the Encryption Regulation), and as described in Chapter 
IV "Policies Affecting Trade in Goods", Section A "Import Regulations",  Subsection (b) "Import 
Licensing" of this Report, many goods with encryption technology no longer required an import licence and hence their importation did not require an activity licence either.   
284.  In response to a specific question, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan informed Members 
that to obtain an activity licence related to production and sale of encryption products, a company, including a foreign-invested company, registered as a juridical person of Kazakhstan, had to have in its structure one expert with higher education in  engineering.  The expert could be a citizen of 
Kazakhstan or a foreign national.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 67 - 
 
  285.  A Member stated that pursuant to Article 18 of Law "On Licensing", the "technical 
protection of State secrets", including the "repair and servicing of technical means for protection of State secrets", and the "development and sellin g (including another transfer) of means for 
information cryptographic protection", both required an activity licence.  This Member asked if 
these activities included:  importation, wholesale, or retail sale and leasing of commercially 
available electronic equipment and software with encryption technology used for purposes other than protecting State secrets, e.g., computers,  smart cards, cell phones, etc.; or service and 
repair of after-sales or leased commercially available electronic equipment and software containing 
encryption technology used for purposes other than protecting State secrets.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that the requirement for an activity licence for the "technical protection of State secrets", including "repair and servicing of technical means for protection of 
State secrets", had been eliminated by Law No. 36-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain 
Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on  Issues of Reduction of Licensing Documents and 
Optimization of Control and Supervisory Functions Of State Bodies" of 10 July 2012.  
The representative of Kazakhstan noted that wi thin the framework of the EAEU, pursuant to 
paragraph 11 of the Encryption Regulation, the importation of certain goods with encryption technology, including "mass market goods", was subject to a onetime notification and hence did 
not require an import licence or an activity licence.  Maintenance and repair services of goods were 
not subject to licensing.  However, for distributi on of goods with encryption technology in both 
wholesale and retail sale on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, an activity licence was required for both domestic and imported goods.  
286.  An activity licence was a prerequisite to obtain a licence to import a special technical 
device, as defined in the Regulation "On the Order of Importation into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and Exportation from the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Special 
Technical Devices Designed to Search Technical Channels of Information Leakage" approved by 
Collegium Decision No. 134.  An activity licence for development and production or repair and distribution of special technical devices was required when imported or produced domestically 
special technical devices were supplied to Operative-Investigation Agency entities in the territory 
of Kazakhstan.  To obtain an activity licence, the founders of such company had to have access to State secrets of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
287.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan said that domestically 
produced special technical devices had to undergo the same approval procedure at the National 
Security Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan as imported special technical devices.  An activity licence was required for "development and manufacturing" and "repair and distribution" 
of special technical devices.  She confirmed that the term "distribution" in this case did not include 
importation as a separate action, but that importers of special technical devices were required to hold one of the activity licenses due to the sensitiv ity of the goods.  Previously, an activity licence 
had been issued within 45 days.  However, pursuant to Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments and 
Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republ ic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Improvement of 
Permission  System" of 15 July 2011, the period fo r issuing an activity licence had been reduced to 
15 days.  Activities subject to licensing are listed in the last column of Annex 6 of this Report.  
- (d) Conclusion  
288.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, the 
application of all laws, regulations and other measures affecting importation or exportation of 
goods, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bo dies of the EAEU, would be in conformity with 
relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, in cluding the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures and Articles I, III, VIII, and XI of  the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
1994.  She confirmed that, upon its accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would ensure that the 
person who had the right, according to the EA EU Treaty, EAEU legal instruments, Commission 
Decisions or Kazakhstan legislation, to declar e the imported goods would be permitted to pay 
relevant customs duties, fees and charges in connection with importation of alcohol products, 
pharmaceuticals or products with encryption technology without presenting an import and/or 
activity licence(s) to the customs authorities, and that these goods would be permitted to be 
withdrawn from the territory of the customs checkpoint for the purpose of free circulation in the 
territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan by the ho lder of the respective import and/or activity 
licenses.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 68 - 
 
  A. IMPORT REGULATIONS 
- Ordinary Customs Duties 289.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that from 1 January 2015, the legal basis for 
the customs tariff of Kazakhstan was Article 42 "Common External Tariff of the Eurasian Economic 
Union" and Annex No. 6 "Protocol on Common Customs and Tariff Regulation" of the EAEU Treaty.  
The Common External Tariff (CET) was established by Decision of the Interstate Council of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) No. 18 "On  Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the 
Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Re public of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" 
of 27 November 2009  (hereinafter: Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 18).  According to Article 42 of the EAEU Treaty, the main objectives and purposes of the CET were:  (i) to rationalize the structure of the import of goods to the customs territory of the EAEU; (ii) to 
maintain a rational proportion of imported and exported goods on the customs territory of the 
EAEU; (iii) to create conditions for progressive changes in the structure of manufacturing and consumption of goods in the EAEU; (iv) to provide conditions for effective integration of the EAEU 
into the world economy; and, (v) to support  the sectors of the economy of the EAEU. 
290.  Pursuant to Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate  Council No. 18, tariff rates were established 
by the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinaft er: EEC or Commission).  Furthermore, the rules 
for granting tariff preferences to developing and least-developed countries were stipulated in the 
Protocol on Common System of Tariff Preferences of the Customs Union of 12 December 2008 (hereinafter: Protocol on Tariff Preferences).  
291.  According to the EAEU Treaty, the Commission issued decisions on CET rates based on the 
results of negotiations among the EAEU member States.  From 1 January 2010, the 
EAEU member States had no authority to change import customs duty rates unilaterally.  The representative of Kazakhstan fu rther explained that the tariff exemptions applied 
by the EAEU member States were described in Se ctions "Investment Regime", "Tariff Exemptions" 
and "Trade-Related Investment Measures" of this Report. 
292.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that decisions on CET rates would normally be 
taken by the EEC by a two-thirds qualified majority vote, except for sensitive products 
(the 5,012 specified tariff lines listed in Annex 7 of this Report) on which consensus was required.  Consensus might also be required in other cases specified in the agreements comprising the legal basis of the EAEU.  She added that the position of Kazakhstan on trade policy issues that had been 
delegated to the competence of the EEC, includin g changes proposed by Kazakhstan or other EAEU 
member States in CET and non-tariff measures, was reviewed and approved by the Government Inter-Agency Commission on Trade Policy Issues and Participation in International Economic 
Organizations.  
293.  In response to the request of a Member to remove from Article 1 of the Agreement on 
Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of 25 Janua ry 2008 the provision stating the objective of 
the CET as "to protect the economy of the Customs Union from unfavourable influence of foreign 
competition", the representative of Kazakhstan replied that this provision was not incorporated into the EAEU Treaty and therefore no  longer existed as of 1 January 2015. 
294.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that  Kazakhstan had replaced a 9-digit tariff 
nomenclature with a 10-digit nomenclature on 1 January 2004, which had been based on the 
2002 revision of the Harmonized Description and Coding System (HS 2002).  Later, new import duties had been established by Government Resolution No. 1317 "On Customs Tariff and 
Goods Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Acti vity of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
28 December 2007 and these had been applied until 1 January 2010.  Asked to provide the Customs Tariff schedule in HS 2007, including the concordance table between HS 2002 and 
HS 2007, the representative of Kazakhstan said that CET rates could be found on the official 
website of the Commission (http:// www.eurasiancommission.org/en/ 
act/trade/catr/Pages/default.aspx). The concordance table HS 2002-2007 had been provided separately to the WTO Secretariat.    
295.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, from 1 January 2010, CET applied tariff 
rates had been established in the Common Tariff Nomenclature of the Foreign Economic Activity of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 69 - 
 
  the Customs Union, which had been based on th e HS 2007 nomenclature, as provided for in the 
Agreement "On Common Tariff Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the EurAsEC" of 11 June 2003.  As of January 2012, according to CU Commission Decision No. 850 "On New 
Version of the Common Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Customs 
Union and Common External Tariff of the Customs Union" of 18 November 2011, Kazakhstan 
applied CET tariff rates based on the HS 2012 nomenclature.  WTO tariff negotiations had been conducted in the HS 2002 nomenclature, reflecting the tariff nomenclature Kazakhstan had been 
using at the time these negotiations had commenced.  Based on the results of bilateral market 
access negotiations on goods, the WTO Secretariat had completed the Draft Consolidated Schedule of Tariff Concessions and Commitments and had converted it into the HS 2007 nomenclature.    
296.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  currently the CET consisted of 11,170 tariff 
lines.  A significant majority of tariff lines (9,208 items) were subject to ad valorem  duties and 
216 tariff lines were subject to specific duties.  The ad valorem  rates ranged from 0% to 30%, 
except for a limited number of products, including meat products, i.e., beef, pork and poultry, on 
which EAEU member States applied tariff rate quotas, where in-quota rates were established at 
the level between 0% and 25%, and out-of-quota rates were between 50% and 80%.  Tariff items 
subject to specific rates included apples, chocolate, beer, and strong alcoholic beverages. 
297.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the remaining 1,746 tariff items in the 
CET were subject to combined (mixed) duties.  She explained that combined duties were 
expressed in terms of alternative rates, one as an ad valorem  rate and the other as a specific rate 
that served as a minimum rate of duty, e.g., 5%, but no less than €1 per kg.  Either the 
ad valorem  duty rate or the specific duty rate was applied depending exclusively on the customs 
value of the goods.  In response to a question, she noted that combined tariff rates were applied 
to:  live swine, meat, certain species of fish, fermented or acidified milk and cream, whey, butter 
and cheese, bird's eggs, flowers, tomatoes, cucumber s, bananas, citrus fruits, coffee and tea, rice, 
malt and starches, preserved vegetables, plant oils, sausages and other preparations of meat, juices, tea and coffee extracts, yeasts, food preparations not elsewhere specified (ex. HS 2106), 
waters and ethyl alcohol, preparations used in animal feeding, cigars and cigarettes, sodium 
sulphides, resorcinol and its salts, maleic anhy dride, bleaches and soap, dextrin and modified 
starches, plastics and articles thereof, tyres of rubber, leather and fur articles, articles of paper and paperboard, nonwovens, carpets and textile floor  coverings, coated fabrics, textiles, footwear, 
headgear, artificial flowers, ceramic products, imitation jewellery, aluminium and articles thereof, 
tin and articles thereof, apparels, home electronics, cars, watches and furniture.   
298.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at for goods subject to a combined duty, it 
would be ensured, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, that the 
ad valorem  equivalent of the specific duty rate for each tariff line, calculated based on the average 
customs value, would be no higher than the alternative ad valorem  duty rate for that tariff line in 
the Schedule of the Republic of Kazakhstan in accordance with the following provisions: 
(i) On an annual basis, it would be determined, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent 
bodies of the EAEU, whether it was necessary to  reduce the applied specific duty rate to 
ensure that it was no higher than the applied ad valorem duty rate; 
(ii) This calculation would be done two months before the end of each calendar year, 
beginning in the first calendar year after the date of the accession of Kazakhstan; 
(iii) Data for the calculations would be from a three-year period, determined by taking trade 
data from a recent five-year representative period and excluding data for years with the 
highest and lowest trade for that period; 
(iv) Data on trade with countries or territories with which Kazakhstan had a customs union or 
free trade agreement would be excluded from the calculation; and, 
(v) Data would be drawn from the Official Customs Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
notified to the WTO Integrated Database (IDB) unless such data was unavailable.  In such case, IDB and COMTRADE data would be used. 
Kazakhstan would inform Members of the results of these calculations on a tariff line basis and, if 
the results showed that it was necessary to reduce the specific duty rate alternative, this reduction 
would be made and would go into effect automatically, beginning on 1 January of the year 
following the calculation.  In no case wo uld the applied duty (whether expressed in ad valorem  or 
specific terms and whether determined by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU) exceed the bound rate of the combined duty .  If, after reductions based on the annual WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 70 - 
 
  re-calculation and changed circumstances, the spec ific duty rate alternative became significantly 
lower than the ad valorem  alternative rate of duty, Kazakhstan reserved the right to modify 
permanently the form of the duty to a purely ad valorem  duty, at a level that complied with the 
binding for the relevant tariff line.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
299.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that the provision allowing for the 
application of the customs duties at the double MFN rate to the import of goods of undeterminable country origin had been eliminated pursuant to Law No. 211-III "On Amendments and Addenda to 
the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan " of 8 January 2007.  Subsequently, such imports 
were subject to the normal MFN rate.  She further stated that in accordance with Article 36 "Tariff Preferences in Respect of Goods Originating from Developing and/or  Least Developed Countries" of 
the EAEU Treaty and the Protocol on Tariff Prefer ences, Kazakhstan applied the EAEU Generalized 
System of Tariff Preferences for developing and least-developed countries (EAEU GSP Scheme).  
The lists of developing countries beneficiaries of  the EAEU GSP Scheme (Annex 8 of this Report), 
least developed countries beneficiaries of the EAEU GSP Scheme (Annex 9 of this Report) and 
goods originating and imported from developing and least developed countries subject to the EAEU 
GSP Scheme (Annex 10 of this Report) were estab lished by Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate 
Council No. 18 and adopted by CU Commission De cision No. 130 "On Common Customs Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 130).  Under the EAEU GSP Scheme, the import duties applicable to products included into Annex 10 of this Report and originating from developing countries were at the level of 75% of the MFN duty rates 
and from least developed countries at the level of 0%.  
300.  In response to a question by a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
tariff preferences for goods originating from deve loping or least developed countries, that were 
subject to the EAEU GSP Scheme, would be granted if the goods were purchased in that country 
from a resident of the country.  Such goods had to be delivered directly or in transit through third countries to the territory of the EAEU, without them being put into free circulation in those third 
countries in case of transit.  As provided fo r in the Annex to the CU Agreement on Rules for 
Determining the Origin of Goods from Developing and Least Developed Countries of 12 December 2008, goods were also considered purchased in the country of origin if they were purchased at an exhibition or fair. 
301.  In response to requests from Members, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, 
upon its accession to the WTO, the GSP Scheme for developing and least developed countries would be applied, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the EAEU, in conformity 
with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment. 
302.  Some Members expressed concerns that paragraphs 2 and 7 of CU Commission Decision 
No. 130 could allow the application of import duties in a discriminatory manner, either vis-à-vis  
third countries or in relation to certain imports exempted from duties for investment projects.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all import tariffs were applied by Kazakhstan in a non-discriminatory manner vis-à-vis  third countries on the basis of trade and cooperation 
agreements, except if otherwise provided for und er regional trade agreements or the EAEU GSP 
Scheme.  Exemptions from the CET within the fram ework of investment projects were described in 
the Sections "Investment Regime", "Tariff Exemptions" and "Trade-Related Investment Measures" 
of this Report, as appropriate.   
303.  In response to requests from Members, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
Kazakhstan would submit its Information Technology Agreement (ITA) Schedule to the 
ITA Committee for verification, in accordance with ITA procedures, in order to enable Kazakhstan 
to join the ITA when it became a WTO Member.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
304.  Kazakhstan undertook bilateral market access negotiations on goods with Members of the 
Working Party. The results of those negotiations were reflected in a draft consolidated Schedule of 
Concessions and Commitments on Goods circulated by the WTO Secretariat on 26 September 2012 
as document WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/10/Rev.3.   Following Kazakhstan's membership to the EAEU, 
some Members noted that the tariff rates applied by Kazakhstan under the CET differed from the 
results agreed to in the bilateral goods market access negotiations.  Since Kazakhstan had limited WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 71 - 
 
  exceptions from the CET, these Members expressed concern that Kazakhstan would not be in a 
position to implement the tariff rates agreed to in the bilateral market access negotiations. 
305.  In response,  the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, as a result of negotiations 
with those WTO Members with whom it had concluded bilateral goods market access protocols, 
upon accession: 
(a) for those goods for which the final bound tariff rate agreed in bilateral negotiations 
with WTO Members was lower than the final bound tariff rate of the Russian Federation 
as set out in its Protocol of Accession, Kazakhstan would bind its final bound tariff rate 
at the lower rate; 
(b) for those goods for which the final bound tariff rate of the Russian Federation as set 
out in its Protocol of Accession was lower than the final bound tariff rate agreed in 
Kazakhstan's bilateral tariff negotiations, Kazakhstan would bind its relevant final 
bound tariff rate at the lower final bound tariff rate of the Russian Federation;  
(c) for goods identified under subparagraph (b), Kazakhstan would adjust its bindings to 
reflect the staging of reductions that result from the Protocol of Accession of the 
Russian Federation; and,  
(d) For those goods for which the current bound tariff rate of the Russian Federation as set 
out in its Protocol of Accession was lower than the initial or current bound tariff agreed 
in Kazakhstan's bilateral tariff negotiations, Kazakhstan would bind its relevant initial or current bound tariff rate at the lower current bound tariff rate of the Russian 
Federation at every stage of implementation
. 
 
The results of the bilateral market access  negotiations and the commitments undertaken in 
subparagraphs (a) through (d) are contained in the Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on 
Goods number CLXXII and form Annex 1 to the Prot ocol of Accession (hereafter: "the Accession 
Schedule").  
306.  Noting the fact that the tariffs that Kazakhstan applied under the CET were, in some cases, 
higher than those contained in the Accession Schedule, Members inquired how Kazakhstan would ensure the respect of its obligations stemming from its membership of both the WTO and the EAEU. 
307.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would fully implement upon 
accession the commitments contained in the Accession Schedule in particular through the relevant EAEU instruments, including the maintenance of exceptions from the EAEU CET with respect to 
tariff lines for which the EAEU tariff rates are inconsistent with the Accession Schedule, until such 
time as the adjusted tariff rates negotiated and agreed to pursuant to paragraphs 308 to 311 have been bound in the modified schedule of Kazakhstan and been implemented by the EAEU.  In case 
the EAEU does not implement the adjusted rates, the commitments contained in the Accession 
Schedule would prevail.  She further confirmed that all goods, including those referred to in subparagraph (a) of paragraph 305, entering the EAEU territory for import in Kazakhstan would benefit from the rules on transit as they are set out in the WTO Agreement, including Article V of 
the GATT 1994,  irrespective of prohibitions or restrictions of imports into its own territory that a 
specific EAEU member may apply. The Working Party took note of these commitments.  
308.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed  that no earlier than three years and 
six months from the date of full implementation of all the final bound tariff rates contained in the 
Accession Schedule for goods covered by sub-para graph (a) of paragraph 305, Kazakhstan would 
seek to align the Accession Schedule with the final bound tariff rate of the Russian Federation as 
set out in its Protocol of Accession and, therefore, commence negotiations with those 
WTO Members that had concluded bilateral goods market access protocols with Kazakhstan and would be affected by such alignment, i.e., thos e holding INRs or those having a principal or 
substantial supplying interest by the date on which the negotiations start or those having annual 
average imports into Kazakhstan of at least US$ 175,000 per tariff line per year during the period 
of 2008-2013 (hereafter: "affected Members").  For that purpose, six months before the start of the negotiations Kazakhstan would notify WTO Members of its intention to commence them and 
would provide to Signatory Members that had concluded bilateral goods market access protocols 
with Kazakhstan all data relevant for the conduct of those negotiations, which includes the list of items subject to modification with the corresponding tariff line numbers and tariff rate information WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 72 - 
 
  and statistics of imports of the products involved, by country of origin, for the last three years for 
which statistics are available.  The Workin g Party took note of these commitments.  
309.  The negotiations referred to in paragraph 308 would include the tariff rate increases on 
goods subject to sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph 305.  The negotiations referred to in paragraph 
308 would not include tariff rate increases on goods subject to sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph 
305.  For goods subject to negotiation, the represen tative of Kazakhstan confirmed that no tariff 
lines subject to increase of the bound import tariff rates of Kazakhstan would be a priori  excluded 
from the scope of these negotiations.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
310.  The negotiations referred to in paragraph 308 would be entered into in good faith with a 
view to achieving within 3 years from commencement of such negotiations mutually satisfactory compensatory adjustment.  The negotiations of compensatory adjustment may include formula 
approaches and requests on specific priority tariff  lines.  The value of compensatory adjustment  
with respect to each affected Member should be calculated as the difference between the value of duties payable for the average yearly MFN imports to Kazakhstan from that affected Member that 
occurred during the reference period of three year s of trade data available at the start of the 
negotiations, calculated on the basis of the final bound tariff rates of the Russian Federation, and the value of duties payable for the same trade, calculated on the basis of the final bound tariff 
rates of Kazakhstan.  In these negotiations any SPS measures or special circumstances existing in 
the EAEU that have affected trade during the refe rence period will be taken into account.  In the 
event that satisfactory compensatory adjustment is not achieved within the timeframe for the negotiations, the matter should be referred to the WTO General Council. The Working Party took 
note of these commitments. 
311.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, as the alignment of the Schedule results 
from membership in a customs union, she should endeavor to ensure all members of the EAEU 
which are WTO Members should enter into those negotiations and participate in the compensatory 
tariff adjustment negotiations.  She further confirmed that the representative of the Russian Federation had stated on several occasions that the Russian Federation, which is also a member of 
the EAEU, would have to participate in such compensatory adjustment in line with WTO obligations 
applicable to customs unions.   The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
312.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, under the EAEU regime described in 
paragraphs 251 and 252 of the Report of the Work ing Party on the Accession of Kazakhstan and in 
paragraphs 185 and 186 of the Report of the Wo rking Party on the Accession of the Russian 
Federation to the WTO, the WTO commitments unde rtaken by an EAEU member are part of the 
EAEU legal framework.  The representative of th e Russian Federation supported the statements of 
the representative of Kazakhstan reflected under paragraphs 311 and 312 of this Report.  
313.  To reflect the results of these negotiations, the CET and the Accession Schedule will be 
modified.  For goods subject to negotiation according to paragraph 309 Kazakhstan confirmed that 
it would not have recourse to  Articles XXIV:6 or XXVIII of th e GATT 1994 and will continue to 
apply the commitments contained in the Accession Schedule from the date of its accession until such time as the adjusted tariff rates are negotiated and agreed by consensus with the affected  
Members have been bound in the modified schedul e of Kazakhstan and been implemented by the 
EAEU.  In case the EAEU does not implement th e adjusted rates, the commitments contained in 
the Accession Schedule would prevail.  The Wo rking Party took note of these commitments.  
- Other Duties and Charges 
314.  A Member sought a commitment from Kazakhstan that it would not list any other duties 
and charges (ODCs) in its Goods Schedule under Article II:1(b) of the GATT 1994, binding such charges at zero from the date of accession to the WTO.  
315.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that duties on imports were applied in 
accordance with Article 42 "Common External Tariff of the Eurasian Economic Union" and Annex No. 6 "Protocol on Common Customs and Tariff Regulation" of the EAEU Treaty, Decision of the Interstate Council of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) No. 18 "On Common Customs 
and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan 
and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 and CU Commission Decision No. 130 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 73 - 
 
  "On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009.  These provisions authorized the Commission to establish and change the customs tariffs of the EAEU member States, including Kazakhstan, as described in Section "Ordinary Customs Duties" of 
this Report.  No other duties and charges were  authorized.  Therefore, she confirmed that 
Kazakhstan did not apply any other duties and charges on imports within the meaning of Article II:1(b) of the GATT 1994.   
316.  Noting this statement, some Members asked Kazakhstan to bind at zero other duties and 
charges (ODCs) in its Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods and to undertake a commitment that it would not apply such measures except in conformity with WTO obligations. 
317.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan had bound all tariffs in its 
Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Good s.  She confirmed that from the date of its 
accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would not apply other duties and charges within the meaning of 
Article II:1(b) of the GATT 1994 and would bind such  duties and charges at zero in relation to all 
goods.  These bindings were recorded in the Sc hedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan annexed to the GA TT 1994.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
- Tariff Exemptions 
318.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that from 1 January 2015, the legal basis for 
granting tariff exemptions imported into the EAEU  was Article 43 "Tariff Exemptions" and Part II of 
Annex No. 6 "Protocol on Common Customs and Tariff Regulation" of the EAEU Treaty.  Part II of 
Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty provided a framew ork for a unified list of tariff exemptions.  
Article 45 of the EAEU Treaty authorized the EEC to establish unified lists.  More specific provisions regarding the unified list of tariff exempted goods we re elaborated in the Decision of the Interstate 
Council of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) No. 18 "On Common Customs Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" (hereinafter: Decision of the EurAsEC Council No. 18) and CU Commission 
Decision No. 130 "On Common Customs and Tariff  Regulation of the Customs Union of the 
Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan  and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 
(hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 130).   CU Commission Decision No. 331 "On Approval of the List of Goods Temporarily Imported with Conditional Exemptions from Payments of Customs 
Duties, Taxes, and on Conditions of such Exemptions, including Time-Frames" of 18 June 2010 
(hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 331)  approved the list of temporarily imported goods fully exempt from payment of customs duties.  Th e EAEU Treaty and the Decisions also provided 
for other types of exemptions, e.g., for investment purposes (described in Sections "Trade-Related 
Investment Measures" and "Industrial Policy including Subsidies" of this Report), tariff preferences for developing and least developed countries (described in Section "Ordinary Customs Duties" of 
this Report) and tariff rate quotas (described in Section "Tariff Rate Quotas" of this Report).  
Special limited derogations for individual EAEU me mber States from the CET were elaborated in 
the Protocol on Conditions and Procedure for Use in Exceptional Cases of the Rates of Import Customs Duties Other than Common Customs Tariff Rates of 12 December 2008 (hereinafter: 
Protocol on Exceptions from the CET), which expired on 1 January 2015. 
319.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that pr ior to 1 January 2010, the granting of tariff 
exemptions had been regulated by Customs Code of Kazakhstan No.401-II of 5 April 2003, and 
Resolutions of the Government of Kazakhstan No . 668 "On Adoption of the List of Temporarily 
Imported Goods Exempt from All Customs Duties and Taxes and Temporarily Exported Goods from 
All Customs Duties" of 8 July 2003 (hereinafter: Government Resolution No. 668), and No. 1092 
"On Adoption of the List of Leasing Objects Subject to the Customs Regime of Temporary 
Importation and Temporary Exportation of Goods" of 21 August 2001 (hereinafter: Government Resolution No. 1092).  Article 330 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan had provided for tariff exemptions for: (i) diplomatic imports; and (ii) goods imported for implementation of investment 
projects granted for a period of up to five ye ars.  The Investments Committee under the Ministry 
of Industry and Trade had been in charge of pr oviding investment preferences, including customs 
duty exemptions. 
320.  In accordance with Part II of Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty and the relevant provisions 
of the CU Customs Code, tariff exemptions could be granted to the following goods imported into WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 74 - 
 
  the customs territory of the EAEU:  (i) goods imported under the customs control within the 
customs regimes established by the customs legislation; (ii) goods imported as a contribution to the charter capital by foreign investor within th e time-frame determined by the charter documents 
for capital formation; and, (iii) goods imported within the framework of international cooperation 
of the EAEU member States with third countries in  the field of research and exploration of space, 
and also within the agreements regarding services in spacecraft launch.  The specific list of the above-mentioned goods to be exempted was approved by CU Commission Decision No. 727 "On 
Introduction of Amendments to Decision of the Customs Union Commission No.130 'On Common 
Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation' of 27 November 2009" of 22 June 2011. 
321.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  goods could be exempted from the customs 
duty within the framework of customs regimes provided for in relevant customs legislation e.g., 
the CU Customs Code.  Article 80 of the CU Customs Code listed the situations when customs duties need not to be paid, which reflected circumstances faced by customs officials in the course 
of customs processing.  These circumstances included:  (i) when it was provided for in accordance 
with the legislation of the EAEU member States or the provisions of the CU Customs Code; (ii) when customs duties had already been paid or when the amount owed was less than EUR5; 
(iii) when goods were exempted from customs duti es during the period of validity of such an 
exemption and when fulfilling the conditions, under  which such exemption was granted; (iv) when 
goods were placed under customs procedures (reg imes) not providing for such payment; (v) when 
the total customs value of goods imported by on e person on one invoice did not exceed €200; 
(vi) when goods had been destroyed or irretrievably lost as a consequence of an accident, force 
majeure , or as the result of natural deterioration under normal transportation and storage prior to 
their release; (vii) when goods had been converted into property of a member State in accordance 
with its national legislation; and, (viii) when goods were not released.  
322.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that  Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty and the 
relevant provisions of the CU Customs code provided that for the list of exemptions from the 
customs tariff rates, the following categories of goods were exempt from import customs duty:  
(i) means of transport of international shipment s of freight, baggage and passengers, and goods 
that maintained them; (ii) products of fishing operations owned or leased by natural and juridical persons of the EAEU member States; (iii) goods imported for official or personal use by third 
countries' diplomats; (iv) currency and securities in accordance with the  national legislation of the 
member States; (v) goods imported as humanitarian or disaster aid; (vi) goods imported as assistance (including technical assistance) and charity from third countries and international 
organizations; (vii) goods covered by import customs regimes which called for such duty 
exemption; (viii) goods imported by natural person s for their own use, in accordance with customs 
regulation legislation; and, (ix) goods subject to  Government expropriation by the member States 
as provided for in their legislation.  Tariff exemptions could also be provided in other cases 
established by the EAEU Treaty, international agr eements of the EAEU with third parties and acts 
of the Commission. 
323.  Tariff exemptions in cases not stipulated in Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty were applied 
only by the Commission decisions based on consensus.  CU Commission Decision No. 130 
approved tariff exemptions applied by the EAEU member States apart from tariff exemptions stipulated in Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty. 
324.  The EEC was authorized by the EAEU Treaty  and Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate 
Council No. 18 to operate the CET, including the au thority to add or remove goods from the list of 
exemptions.  A consensus vote was required, if an EEC Decision concerned changes in customs 
duty levels on goods included into the List of se nsitive products, or where the decision on granting 
of tariff exemptions was taken.  
325.  She added that, in accordance with Article 2 of the Protocol on Exceptions from the CET, 
the EEC could decide that a higher duty rate th an the CET would be applied by one of the EAEU 
member States in case if such a measure was a necessary condition for development of the 
relevant industry of that member State.  A lower duty rate would be applied in the following cases:  (i) the concerned member State faced critical shortage of goods; (ii) such a measure was 
necessary to address the social needs of the popula tion for the concerned member State; or (iii) to 
address the needs of industries, which depended largely on imports from third countries and could not be replaced with the production of supplemen tary or similar goods produced in the EAEU.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 75 - 
 
  Article 4 of the Protocol on Exceptions from th e CET provided that the EEC Decisions, in these 
cases, were adopted by consensus and that a diff erent tariff rate by one member State could be 
applied for no longer than six months, unless exte nded, following the relevant procedures foreseen 
in the Protocol on Exceptions from the CET.   
326.  A Member asked if there was a process for third parties to challenge such exceptions from 
the CET.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the EEC took a decision on application of a 
higher or lower tariff rate upon proposal by an EAEU member State, provided that such measure 
was justified and other EAEU member States di d not agree to change the CET tariff rate.  
She added that exceptions from the CET applied in  "exceptional circumstances" should be based 
on an MFN principle and should not be higher th an the import duty bound rates committed by any 
member State upon accession to the WTO.  Therefore, Kazakhstan did not see a basis for 
challenging the exceptions by third parties.   
327.  CU Commission Decision No. 130 had initially included a list of 409 tariff lines, towards 
which Kazakhstan applied import customs duty rates different from the CET during various 
transitional periods of up to five years.  Subsequently, taking into account that for some goods the 
transitional periods had already expired, as well  a s  d u e  t o  d i f f i c u l t i e s  w i t h  m o n i t o r i n g  t h e  
movement of goods across the border after the formation of a common customs territory and the 
removal of customs border checkpoints between the Russian Federation and the Republic of 
Kazakhstan as of 1 July 2011, the list had been revised and significantly reduced down to 72 tariff 
lines (see Annex 11 of this Report).  These exemptions expired on 1 January 2015. 
328.  She further added that CU Commission Decision No. 130 allowed duty-free importation of 
raw cane sugar (HS 1701 11) in 2010-2019 for processing in sugar-processing plants on the 
territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Raw cane sugar could be imported only upon obtaining a permit from the authorized body of Kazakhstan (the Ministry of National Economy).  The permit 
prescribed the end-use of raw cane sugar.  The raw cane sugar and white sugar produced from 
such raw cane sugar could not be exported to the territories of other member States.  Government Resolutions No. 146 "On Certain Issues of Importation of Sugar and Raw Sugar to the Territory of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 1 March 2010 and No. 34 "On Certain Issues of Importation of Raw 
Sugar to the Territory of the Republic of Kaza khstan" of 26 January 2011 determined the duty-free 
quota for imported raw cane sugar for 2010 and 2011,  respectively, and approved the list of sugar 
producers to which the quota was allocated.   
329.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  i n  c a s e  a n  E A E U  m e m b e r  S t a t e  d e f i n e d  
individual beneficiaries of a tariff exemption, this member State had to present to the EEC its 
proposals on the control mechanism over the use of the imported goods with a view to preventing 
their misuse and release into free circulation on the territory of other member States.  
The exemption was granted by approval of the EEC.  
330.  A Member enquired about Government Resolutions Nos. 668 and 1092.  In particular, this 
Member asked Kazakhstan to specify the goods falling within the scope of Government Resolutions 
Nos. 668 and 1092 and clarify the terms of the 3% charge per month on other temporary goods:  if this was 3 percentage points of the total tariff level or 3% of the duties that would have been collected and if the total charge applicable capped at the amount of the normally payable duty.  
This Member also asked if this covered "trade in transit" or if "temporary importation" was a 
separate customs regime from transit.  In repl y, the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
Government Resolutions No. 668 and No. 1092 were no longer in force.  
331.  She further explained that goods temporarily imported to Kazakhstan (i.e., subject to 
subsequent exportation) could be exempt from cu stoms duties and taxes, either in whole or in 
part.  The list of temporarily imported goods fu lly exempt from payment of customs duties and 
taxes had been approved by CU Commission Decisi on No. 331 and included the following groups of 
goods:  (i) containers and other returnable contai ners; (ii) goods imported to assist foreign trade 
and international cooperation; (iii) goods temporarily imported for application in science, culture, cinematography, sports and tourism; (iv) goods imported for humanitarian aid; and (v) other 
goods.  While goods falling within the scope of CU Commission Decision No. 331 were fully exempt 
from payment of duties, other temporarily-imported goods as stipulated in Article 282 of the CU Customs Code were subject to a fee of 3% of th e amount of the import customs duty and taxes 
payable, that would have been collected if the g oods were released for domestic consumption, for 
each month the goods remained on the customs te rritory of the EAEU.  The term of temporary WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 76 - 
 
  importation was determined by the customs body on  the basis of the objectives and circumstances 
of the importation, and could not exceed a period of two years from the date when the goods were 
placed under the customs procedure of temporary importation.  The term of temporary importation could be extended beyond two year s at the written request of an applicant.  
To conform to the provisions of the temporary importation procedure, goods had to remain 
unchanged during the period of temporary importatio n.  The total charge applicable capped at the 
amount of the normally payable duty.  She added that the provisions established for the customs 
procedure of "temporary import of goods" did not extend to the customs procedure of "transit of 
goods".  
332.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that CU Commission Decisions No. 130 and No. 
331 granted certain tariff exemptions for imported civil aircraft (for more details, see Chapter IV 
"Policies Affecting Trade in Goods", Section C "Internal Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Goods", 
Sub-section "Trade in Civil Aircraft" of this Report).   
333.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that Kazakhstan did not apply any 
other tariff exemptions than those described in this and other relevant Sections of this Report. 
- Tariff Rate Quotas  334.  Some Members considered that the introduction of tariff rate quotas (TRQs) had been a 
step backward from the trade liberalization that sh ould be expected from the country acceding to 
the WTO and that, in their view, a tariff-only regime would be preferable as it would allow for the market to select suppliers that provided the best combination of price, quality, and stable offer of goods.  They requested a description of the current and prospective legal authority for introducing 
TRQs and determining the rules for allocating quota among importers as well as any related 
licensing procedures in Kazakhstan and in the EAEU.   
335.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Article 44 "Tariff Rate Quotas" (TRQs) and Part 
III of Annex No. 6 "Protocol on Common Custom s and Tariff Regulation" of the EAEU Treaty 
provided the general legal framework for the introduction of TRQs in the EAEU member States, including Kazakhstan.  The national legislation included Law No. 544-II "On Regulation of Trade 
Activity" of 12 April 2004 (hereinafter: Law No. 544-II) and other measures adopted on the basis 
of the EAEU legal acts.   
336.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, pursuant to paragraph 2 of Part I of Annex 
No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty, a tariff rate quota was a measure of control over the importation into 
the customs territory of the EAEU of certain kinds of agricultural products originating in third 
countries applied within a fixed period of time.  Such measures provided for application of differentiated rates of the CET with regard to goods imported within the established volume (in 
kind and in value) within a fixed period of time and in excess of that volume.  The criteria for 
introduction of TRQs were provided for in Article 44 of the EAEU Treaty.  TRQs could be introduced 
for agricultural products originating in third countries if the like goods were produced (extracted, 
cultivated) on the customs territory of the EAEU.  Pursuant to this Article, volumes of imported 
goods exceeding quota levels were levied at rates of the CET.  Between 2010 and 2012, the CU 
Commission had allocated TRQs on an annual basis among the member States based on proposals 
from the member States.  Starting from 1 February 2012, the member States delegated this 
authority to the EEC. 
337.  CU Commission Decision No. 865 of 18 Novemb er 2011 had approved the list of products 
subject to TRQs (beef, pork and poultry), had a llocated TRQs, and had fixed the volumes of TRQs 
for importation of these goods to the territory of each member State for 2012.  Resolution of the 
Government of Kazakhstan No. 269 "On Certain Issues of Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas Volumes for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat" of 24 March 2011 (hereinafter: Government Resolution 
No. 269) had approved the rules for allocation of  TRQ volumes among suppliers.  Kazakhstan had 
not applied any TRQs to imports before 2010.  
338.  In accordance with paragraphs 7 and 8 of Pa rt III of Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty, the 
method of TRQs allocation among participants of foreign trade activities (suppliers) had to be 
non-discriminatory with respect to the form of ownership, place of registration or market share.  
The EEC, when taking a decision on application of TRQs to agricultural products, had to observe WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 77 - 
 
  the following terms:  (i) TRQs had to be established for a specific period of time; (ii) if TRQs had to 
be distributed among third countries, all the interest ed third countries had to be duly informed of 
the allocated TRQ volumes; and (iii) information on the establishment of TRQs, its global volume and duration, in-quota import duty rates, as well  as on the distribution among third countries had 
to be published.   
339.  According to paragraphs 5 and 6 of Part III of Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty, the TRQ 
volume established by the EECon imports of goods into the customs territory of the EAEU could not 
exceed the difference between the volume of cons umption and production of the like product on 
the customs territory of the EAEU.  If the producti on volume of the like product was equal to the 
volume of consumption on the customs territory of  the EAEU, or exceeded it, TRQs could not be 
established.  However, if the production volume of the like product was equal to the volume of 
consumption of the product or exceeded it in one of the EAEU member States, such difference was 
not considered when allocating the TRQ volumes for the customs territory of the EAEU.   
340.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that customs clearance of goods 
subject to TRQs had to be made in the EAEU member State where the supplier received its TRQ 
share.  The goods had to be accompanied with an original licence issued by the authorized 
government body, the Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  In this 
context, she noted that Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Regulation Concerning Third 
Countries" to the EAEU Treaty contained provisions on the licensing procedure.  Licenses were issued within 15 working days from the date  of submission of the following set of 
documents:  (i) an application for a licence; (ii) an electronic copy of the application; (iii) a copy of 
a foreign trade agreement (contract); (iv) a copy of the registration document in tax authorities; 
and, (v) a document confirming payment of a lice nsing fee.  The set of documents for a licence 
had to be submitted to the Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Licenses 
remained valid until the end of the calend ar year in which they were issued.   
341.  The EEC had also determined that the TRQs in the EAEU member States were to be 
administered by the governments of the EAEU member States in accordance with their respective 
national legislation.  In Kazakhstan, TRQs we re regulated by Law No. 544-II and Government 
Resolution No. 269. Government Resolution No. 269 approved the rules for allocation of volumes of TRQs between suppliers, which provided for allocation based on the "historical principle", i.e., allocations proportionate to the volume of imports in the previous period.  She stated that 
Government Resolution No. 269 also contained the following definitions:  
(i) TRQ volume - the volume of imported goods determined by the Government of Kazakhstan 
annually which were subject to the in-quota import duty rate; 
(ii) participants of foreign economic activities (suppliers) – natural or juridical persons that 
had been importing beef, pork or poultry during  the previous period in accordance with the 
following criteria:  it had been importing beef, pork or poultry (i) from the 
country-suppliers; (ii) in volumes not less than 25 kg during the year prior to the year of 
TRQ establishment; and, (iii) during the year prior to the year of TRQ establishment; 
(iii) the previous period – two years prior to the year of TRQ establishment;  (iv) country-suppliers - the countries that had no free trade agreements with the 
EAEU member States or had exemptions from the free trade regime with regard to beef, 
pork or poultry under TRQs; and, 
(v) the supplier's import volume - the actual volume of beef, pork or poultry under 
TRQs imported by the supplier from the country-suppliers, which was determined on the 
basis of foreign trade statistics. 
342.  Some Members expressed concern that the TRQ regime that Kazakhstan applied under the 
EAEU, did not appear to allocate any in-quota volume to new entrants.  As the representative 
stated above, it appeared that a new importer entering the market had to import at the over-quota rate which acted to limit the quantity of imports.  Thus, in subsequent years, this 
importer would qualify only for a small in-quota allocation, since allocations were based on imports 
over the previous year.  In these Members' view, this did not provide sufficient flexibility in the 
market.  These Members further emphasized that allocating TRQs only to historical suppliers could be problematic as some suppliers were no longer participants in the market. 
343.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Resolution of the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan No. 1189 "On Certain Issues of Allocation of Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas on WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 78 - 
 
  Imports of Certain Kinds of Meat" of 8 Nove mber 2013, had introduced the mechanism of 
allocation of TRQs for new suppliers.  Pursuant to this Resolution, the volumes of TRQs were allocated among new suppliers in the order of priority of application for new suppliers for import licenses.  Import licenses were issued by the auth orized body in the field of regulation of trade 
activity until exhaustion of volumes of TRQs established for new suppliers.  She also noted that 
allocation of the in-quota volume per supplier shou ld not exceed 15% of the total volume of tariff 
rate quota established for new suppliers. 
344.  In response to a specific question regarding the "economically viable quantities", the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that in calculation of the share of historical suppliers within the total volume of imports during the two preceding years, all supplies exceeding 25 kg were taken into account.  Thus, TRQs were allocated between historical suppliers in proportion to the 
shares determined based on mathematical formulae.  Suppliers could annually apply for the 
in-quota volume not exceeding their yearly share within the in-quota volume annually established by the Government.  Therefore, in her opinion, the TRQ allocation mechanism established by 
Government Resolution No. 269 was fully consistent with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on 
Import Licensing Procedures.   
345.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that in accordance with the rules approved 
by Government Resolution No. 269, TRQ volumes for beef, pork or poultry were allocated in two 
stages:  at the first stage , annually by 31 December of the year preceding the year when a TRQ entered into force, 25% of the total annual TRQ volumes were allocated among suppliers according to the formula; and at the second stage , annually by 1 April of the year when a TRQ entered into 
force, 100% of the total annual TRQ volumes were allocated according to the formula, which 
deducted the TRQ volume allocated during the first stage.  TRQs for imports of beef, fresh or chilled (HS Code 0201) were allocated on a "first come, first served" basis.  The formulae used for 
allocation of TRQ volumes between suppliers, are provided in Annex 12 of this Report.   
346.  The representative of Kazakhstan recalled that TRQ volumes were determined on an 
annual basis.  She stated that CU Commission Decisions No. 505 of 18 November 2010 and 
No. 865 of 18 November 2011 had allocated TRQs for beef, pork and poultry, and had established 
the TRQ volumes for each member State in 2011 and 2012, respectively.  The TRQ volumes established for Kazakhstan had been the same in 2010 and 2011.  In 2012, TRQ volumes for beef and pork had been increased.  EEC Decision No. 229 "On the List of Products, with respect to 
which Tariff Rate Quotas, and the Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas to the Territories of the 
member States of the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space for 2013 are Established" of 20 November 2012, had introduced a tariff rate quota on milk whey and established TRQ volumes 
for 2013.  EEC Collegium Decision No. 242 "On the List  of Goods  with respec t to which Tariff Rate 
Quotas, and the Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas for Imports to the Territories of the member-States 
of the Customs Union and the Single Econ omic Space for 2014 are Established" of 
29 October 2013 had provided for TRQ volumes for 2014.  The TRQ volumes for 2010-2014 are 
provided in Table 1 .   
Table 1:  TRQ Volumes for 2010 – 2014 
HS Code Product Name TRQ volumes for 2010 – 2014, thousand tonnes 
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
0201 Beef, fresh or chilled 0.02 0.02 0.02  
15.4 0.02 
0202 Beef, frozen 10.0 10.0 13.9 15.3 
0203 Pork 
7.4 7.4 9.4 9.7 9.7 0203 29 550 2, 
0203 29 900 2 Pork trimmings 
0207 Poultry 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 
347.  A Member expressed concern regarding delays in allocating the 2012 TRQ volumes and 
that these delays were precluding trade.  This Member reported that according to industry sources, 
the Government Resolution allocating the quot a volumes had not been signed.  The Member 
requested information on when the Resolution woul d be signed and requested that the situation be 
resolved quickly to allow for trade.  Further, the Member requested assurances that these types of delays would not occur in the future.  The repres entative of Kazakhstan replied that Government 
Resolution No. 1085 on allocated TRQ volumes for the year 2012 had been adopted on 
24 August 2012.  The delays were caused due to problems related to the accuracy of customs WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 79 - 
 
  statistics.  She further stated that in accordance with Law No. 239-V "On Amendments and 
Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Delimitation of 
Competence between the Levels of Public Admini stration" of 29 September 2014, the substantial 
part of state decision-making authority had been delegated from the level of the Government to 
the central and local executive bodies.  Thus, the Law delegated to the body responsible for 
regulation of trade activities the authority to establish TRQs on imports and/or exports of certain kinds of goods, determine allocation method s and procedures, the volume and period of 
application of TRQs.  The representative of Kazakhstan recalled that the Ministry of National 
Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan was the authorized body for allocation of volumes of tariff rate quotas and for issuing import licenses for beef, pork or poultry under TRQs.  Decision on allocation of volumes of tariff rate quotas was adopted by the Decree of the Minister of National 
Economy that reduced the timeframes for TRQ allocation.  The State Revenue Committee of the 
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan had to report to the Ministry of National Economy 
quarterly on the actual volume of imported beef , pork and poultry, respectively.  The procedure 
and mechanism of allocation of tariff rate quotas  remained the same, as described in paragraphs 
341, 343, 344, 345 and 346 of this Report.   
348.  A Member expressed concern regarding the imposition of TRQs for poultry products and 
stated that imposition of new trade restrictions during the course of WTO accession was contrary 
to the general principle of standstill with regard to trade restrictions during accession negotiations.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan stated  that production of poultry was one of the key 
segments of agricultural sector in Kazakhstan, which provided thousands of jobs in rural areas.  
Hence for Kazakhstan, it was important to preserve the right to apply TRQs on poultry.  She noted 
that Kazakhstan had been working closely with Working Party Members in order to elaborate a mutually acceptable solution. 
349.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
the TRQ mechanism set-out in Section I-B of Part I of the Schedule of Tariff Concessions and Commitments on Goods of Kazakhstan contained the information on in-quota tariff rates and 
quantities eligible for the in-quota tariff rates for TRQs for beef, pork and poultry.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further explai ned that currently Kazakhstan did not allocate 
country-specific TRQs.  Therefore, TRQs were allocated on the basis of the "historical principle" among suppliers - residents of Kazakhstan - proporti onally to the volume of the goods imported in 
the previous period.  Thus, at this time, Kazakhstan had no need for a reallocation mechanism and 
did not have one in place.   
350.  One Member emphasized that the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures 
required that in the administration of quotas by means of licensing, quota allocations make 
provision for new entrants to the market and the issuing of licences for imports in commercially 
viable quantities.  This Member stated that provision also needed to be made for the reallocation 
of unused quantities of the TRQs by the original recipients of the licences in the cases of country 
specific allocations.  This Member stated that Kazakhstan should establish a  mechanism to allow 
for access to the TRQs by new entrants, that ensured that allocated amounts were commercially viable, and that dealt with the issue of reallocation of unused quota designations to ensure full 
utilization of the TRQs when allocations were made on a country-specific basis.   
351.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession of Kazakhstan 
to the WTO, import TRQs applied in Kazakhstan would be administered, whether by the competent 
bodies of the EAEU or by authorities of Kazakhstan, in a manner that was consistent with 
the GATT 1994 and other relevant WTO Agreements, including the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures and the Agreement on Agriculture.   She further confirmed that, in implementing TRQs, 
Kazakhstan would provide opportunity for new entrants seeking access to in-quota allocations 
under the TRQs, and would provide for allocations under the TRQs in economic quantities as provided for in paragraph 5 of the "Understanding  on Tariff Rate Quota Administration Provisions 
of Agricultural Products, as Defined in Article 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture"
14.  In case, if 
Kazakhstan decided to allocate TRQs on a country-specific basis, it would provide for a 
transparent, predictable and timely reallocation mechanism that allowed for full utilization of TRQs by WTO Members.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
                                               
14 WT/MIN(13)/39; WT/L/914. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 80 - 
 
  - Fees and Charges for Services Rendered 
352.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that Article 72 of the Customs Union 
(CU) Customs Code left the authority for the application of customs fees to the EAEU member States.  In Kazakhstan, customs f ees and charges currently were regulated by the 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "O n Customs Issues in the Republic of Kazakhstan" 
of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter: Customs Code of Kazakhstan) and Government Resolution No. 24 
"On Adoption of Rates of Customs Fees Levied by Customs Bodies" of 21 January 2011.  
Government Resolution No. 669 "On Adoption of Rates of Customs Charges, Charges and Fees 
Levied by Customs Bodies" of 8 July 2003 was no longer in force.   
353.  The representative of Kazakhstan further note d that before adoption of the Customs Code 
of Kazakhstan, which had entered into force as of  1 July 2010, customs fees had been levied for 
(i) customs clearance; (ii) customs escort of goods; and (iii) customs warehousing of goods.  
Fees also had been levied for issuing preliminary decisions on the classification of goods and the 
methodology used for identifying the origin and customs value of goods.  In accordance with 
Article 116 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, cu stoms fees were levied only for (i) customs 
clearance at the time of declaration of goods; (ii) customs escort of goods; and (iii) issuing preliminary decisions.   
354.  The Customs Code of Kazakhstan had abolished the old customs clearance fee levied at 
0.2% of the customs value.  Customs clearance fees and customs escort fees applied in accordance with Government Resolution No. 24 "On Adoption of Rates of Fees Levied by Customs 
Bodies" of 21 January 2011, which established customs clearance fees levied at the time of 
declaration in fixed amounts (euro 
€) per declaration and levied customs escort fees on the basis 
of distance.  The methodology used for calculating customs escort fees included travel expenses of 
customs officials, costs of fuel for transportation, and depreciation costs of vehicles, and it did not 
cover the salaries of customs officials.  In her view, the fees were calculated on the basis of the actual cost of services rendered and theref ore were in conformity with Article VIII of 
the GATT 1994.  Customs fees levied for customs declaration of goods, customs escort, and 
issuing of preliminary decisions were paid to the budget and were non-refundable. 
355.  The customs clearance of goods (and vehicles) in Kazakhstan included: (i) registration of a 
customs declaration; (ii) verification of the application of tariff and non-tariff regulations; 
(iii) verification of accuracy of the declared customs regimes (such as customs transit, customs warehouse, etc.) with customs requirements; (iv) administration of customs fees; (v) 
determination of customs value; and, (vi) classification of goods for the purpose of customs 
examination and customs expert evaluation.  According to paragraph 3 of Article 115 of the 
Customs Code of Kazakhstan, the amount of customs clearance fees levied could not exceed the actual costs incurred by customs bodies during th e customs clearance process.  Customs clearance 
fees were set based on the customs declaration at  €60 for the main list of goods in the customs 
declaration, and at €25 for every additional list, in  case of declaring more than one type of goods 
at once.  Pursuant to Article 120 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, customs clearance fees had 
to be paid before or at the time of submission of the customs declaration.  The fee for issuing 
preliminary decisions on the classification of good s and the origin of goods by the customs bodies 
was set at €70 and had to be paid before the issuance  of such decisions.  In response to a specific 
question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan applied a 
fixed fee for all customs clearance activities irrespective of the type of good, clearance place, time 
and transportation mode.  
356.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
only transit escort fees were levied on the basis of distance.  According to Article 322 of 
the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, customs escort was a measure used by the customs bodies or other organizations stipulated by the legislation of Kazakhstan to convey goods in accordance with 
the customs procedure of the customs transit.  Th e customs bodies could authorize this procedure 
in cases: (i) determined on the basis of the risk management system; (ii) when customs duties and taxes had not been paid or had not been paid  in full; (iii) when the carrier had repeatedly 
failed to fulfil duties with regard to the delivery of goods in accordance with the customs procedure 
of customs transit; and, (iv) as provided for in international agreements to which the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was a party.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 81 - 
 
  357.  The customs escort was initiated no later than within 24 hours of the time the customs 
bodies made the decision on the need for customs escort.  Customs escort fees were calculated on the basis of the distance between the customs po int of departure of the goods to the customs 
point of destination (e.g., ranging from €11 for a distance of up to 50 km to €878 for a distance of 
over 2,000 km).  The methodology for calculation of  customs escort fees is provided in Annex 13 
of this Report.  The fees charged, covered the travel  expenses of customs officials, the cost of fuel 
used for transportation, and depreciation cost of vehicles; it did not cover the salaries of customs 
officials.  If customs escort was provided to the goods transported by several vehicles, the 
customs fee was applied proportionally depending on the number of vehicles.  Customs fees for customs escort had to be paid after the decision on customs escort was made, but no later than on the day that the customs escort began.  
358.  The following items were exempt from payment of customs fees:  (i) vehicles transporting 
passengers and baggage internationally on a regular basis as well as other belongings necessary during transportation; (ii) maintenance supplies, fuel, food and other items exported from the 
customs territory of the EAEU in order to provid e for the operation of Kazakhstan's vessels or 
vessels chartered by Kazakhstan's persons used for marine fishery, as well as marine fishery products imported into Kazakhstan; (iii) national and foreign banknotes and coins (except for 
banknotes and coins of cultural and historical value), and securities; (iv) goods (except for 
excisable goods) imported as humanitarian aid; (v) goods (except for excisable goods, excluding cars for medical purposes) imported for charity purposes; (vi) materials imported by the National Bank of Kazakhstan for the production of bankno tes and coins; (vii) goods imported and exported 
for official use of foreign diplomatic missions and consular establishments, diplomatic, 
administrative and technical personnel of these establishments, including their family members who were not citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan; (viii) goods declared under the customs 
procedure of refusal in favour of the State; and, (ix) goods acquired using the grants of 
governments and international organizations in accordance with the tax legislation of Kazakhstan. 
359.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would, from the date of 
accession, ensure that any fees and charges for services rendered imposed on or in connection 
with importation and exportation, including those listed in paragraph 353 and Annex 13 of this Report, or introduced in the future would be applied in conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, in particular Articles VIII and X of the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade 1994.  She further confirmed that, from th e date of accession, all laws and regulations 
regarding the application and level of any such fees and charges would be published.  Further, upon receipt of a written request of a concerned Member, Kazakhstan would provide to that 
Member information on the revenue collected from a specific fee or charge and on the costs of 
providing the associated services.  The Work ing Party took note of these commitments. 
- Application of Internal Taxes to Imports 
360.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, as of 1 January 2015, the legal framework 
governing the application of indirect taxa tion on imports (and exports) among the 
EAEU member States was contained in the EAEU  Treaty:  Section XVII "Taxes and Taxation" 
(Articles 71-72) and Annex No. 18 "The Protocol on the Procedure of Levying Indirect Taxes and 
on the Mechanism of Control over their Paymen t while Exporting/Importing Goods, Performing 
Works and Rendering Services".  These provisions  replaced the Agreement on the Principles of 
Indirect Tax Collection at Export and Import of  Goods, Performing Works and Rendering Services 
in the Customs Union of 25 January 2008, as amended by the Protocol on Amending the 
Agreement on the Principles of Collection of In direct Taxes on Exports and Imports of Goods, 
Performing Works and Rendering Services in the Customs Union of 11 December 2009; the 
Protocol on the Procedure of Levying Indirect  Taxes upon Performing Works and Rendering 
Services in the Customs Union of 11 December 2009; and the Protocol on the Procedure of Collection of Indirect Taxes and on the Mechanis m of Carrying Out the Control over their Payment 
while Exporting/Importing Goods from/to the Customs Union of 11 December 2009, which were 
terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.   
361.  From 1 January 2015, Section XVII and Annex No. 18 of the EAEU Treaty established that 
goods entering from an EAEU member State to an other member State were subject to excise and 
value-added taxes (VAT) and that goods from an EAEU member State destined to another member 
State were exempted from excise taxes and/or subject to VAT at a zero rate applied by the exporting EAEU member State, provided that docu mentary confirmation of the fact of the export WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 82 - 
 
  and payment of indirect taxes (VAT and exci se taxes) to the budget of the importing 
EAEU member State was submitted to the exporting EAEU member State's tax authorities.  Article 72 of the EAEU Treaty also confirmed that th e rate of duty of these indirect taxes applied to 
imports did not exceed the rate applicable to domestic goods.  Application of indirect taxes to 
imports into special economic zones and free warehouses was established in the Agreement on 
Free (Special) Economic Zones on the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and the Customs Procedures of the Free Customs Zones of 18 June 2010 and the Agreement On Free Warehouses 
and Free Warehouse Customs Procedure of 18 June 2010, as well as in the CU Customs Code.  
Article 70 of the CU Customs Code in force as of 1 July 2010, confirmed that customs bodies of the 
EAEU member States collected VAT and excise taxes on imports into the EAEU from third parties.  
Articles 74, 75 and 76 of the CU Customs Code stated that the levels, method of collection and 
taxable base for these taxes on imports were regu lated by the national legislation of the EAEU 
member States.  Thus, within the framework of the EAEU, Kazakhstan's national legislation determining the application of indirect taxes to imports and exports prior to 1 January 2010 
continued to apply.   
362.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 
99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 
(hereinafter: Tax Code) provided the legal framework for application of internal taxes (VAT and 
excise taxes) on imported goods in the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Local authorities did not have the right to introduce import taxes, as these taxes could only be introduced by the Government through the adoption of new legislative acts or amendments to the Tax Code.  The Tax Code had 
entered into force on 1 January 2009, and was based on the following key principles:  (i) reduction 
of the tax burden of the non-extracting sectors of economy; (ii) reduction of administrative barriers; and (iii) increase in the effectiveness of the tax administration. 
 - Value Added Tax 
363.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that VAT was set at a general rate of 12%, which 
was levied uniformly on domestic and imported products, including those originating from 
the EAEU member States.  VAT was levied on domestic products on the basis of the volume of 
taxable turnover while for imports VAT was levied on the sum of the customs value of goods, as well as other taxes and mandatory payments.  In reply to a specific question from a Member, she specified that in case of excisable goods, excise taxes were included in the taxable base of both 
domestic and imported goods for the purposes of applying VAT.  In reply to a request to detail the 
"other taxes and mandatory payments", the repr esentative of Kazakhstan replied that her 
Government applied excise taxes, import duties and, where applicable, customs levies for customs 
clearance, customs escort and issuing of preliminar y decisions.  Kazakhstan applied the "country of 
destination" principle to imports originating from all trading partners, including the EAEU member States and CIS countries.  Specifically, as of 1 January 2005, all imports of oil, natural 
gas and gas condensate had been subject to the no rmal VAT rate, irrespective of the country of 
origin.  Pursuant to Article 242 of the Tax Code, all exported goods were zero-rated for VAT purposes.  Specifically, since 1 January 2005, the export of ferrous and non-ferrous scrap had been zero-rated for VAT purposes.   
364.  She noted that, in accordance with Article 248 of the Tax Code, the sales turnover of 
certain goods / works / services was exempted from  the payment of VAT.  Goods /works / services 
with sales turnover exempt from the payment of VAT are listed in Annex 14(A) of this Report.  
She further said that the application of VAT within special economic zones and free warehouses 
was discussed in Chapter IV "Policies Affecting Trade in Goods", Section (C) "Internal Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Goods", Sub-section "Free Zones, Special Economic Areas" of this 
Report. 
365.  She further explained that, pursuant to Articl e 255 of the Tax Code, VAT was not levied on 
the imports of:  (i) national and foreign currencies (except for currencies of cultural and historic value), and securities; (ii) goods, imported by natural persons under duty-free regulations of the 
EAEU and the Republic of Kazakhstan; (iii) humanit arian aid, except for excisable goods, imported 
in accordance with procedures established by th e Government; (iv) goods, except for excisable 
goods, imported as charitable assistance thro ugh official channels from States, Governments 
thereof, and international organizations, including for technical assistance purposes; (v) goods 
imported by accredited diplomatic missions and cons ular offices for official use, as well as goods 
imported for personal use by the diplomatic and administrative personnel of these missions, by WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 83 - 
 
  consular officers and employees, and members of their families living with them, that were 
exempted in accordance with international agreements , ratified by Kazakhstan; (vi) goods subject 
to declaration under the customs regulation of th e EAEU and/or the Republic of Kazakhstan under 
customs regimes providing for tax exemptions - cu stoms transit, customs warehouse, processing 
on the customs territory, processing for domestic production, temporary importation, 
re-importation, duty-free trade, refusal of the good in favour of the State, free warehouse, 
destruction and free customs zone; (vii) Government-approved medicines, including medicinal 
substances; articles intended for medical (veterin ary) use, including prosthetic and orthopaedic 
devices, devices for the deaf and blind, medical and veterinary equipment; materials and components for the production of medicines, including substances, medical (veterinary) products, including prosthetic and orthopaedic devices, an d medical (veterinary) equipment; (viii) postage 
stamps (except for collectibles); (ix) raw materials for production of banknotes by the National 
Bank of Kazakhstan and its subordinate bodies; (x ) goods imported under the grants provided by 
States, Governments thereof and international organizations; (xi) imported investment gold, 
except for investment gold imported by the National Bank of Kazakhstan under certain conditions; 
and (xii) investment gold imported by the National Bank of Kazakhstan.  
366.  A Member asked the representative of Kazakhstan to confirm that the general rate of VAT 
was applied equally to all goods, imported and domestic.  In particular, this Member enquired if 
Kazakhstan exempted small businesses and entrep reneurs from VAT payments based on the (low) 
level of their revenues.  Kazakhstan was also asked if there were exemptions from application of the VAT on domestic raw agricultural produce at its first point of sale from the farm.  This Member 
further stated that such exemptions for sales of domestic agricultural produce, but not for similar 
imported articles, appeared to conflict with obligations that Kazakhstan would assume under Article III of the GATT 1994.  This Member asked how Kazakhstan would alter or eliminate the tax 
exemption on domestic agricultural output to restore non-discriminatory treatment vis-à-vis  
similar and identical imported goods.  
367.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that VAT was applied equally to imported and 
domestic goods.  Kazakhstan maintained a simplified taxation system for small businesses, 
including farmers that were not required to register as VAT payers due to their small annual turnover (less than 30,000 MCI).  She stated th at this minimum threshold was an accepted 
international practice applied to small producers with limited technical capacity to apply complex 
tax methodologies.  
368.  The representative of Kazakhstan further added that producers and processors of 
agricultural products could qualify for the following tax regimes:  (i) a regime applicable to peasant 
farms; (ii) a regime applicable to juridical persons - producers of agricultural products and 
products of aquaculture (fish-breeding) and rural consumer cooperatives (agricultural producers); 
or, (iii) a regime applicable to processors of primary agricultural products.   
369.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the first regime applied to peasant 
farms
15 producing agricultural goods or processing and selling their own agricultural produce.  
This regime was based on a "single land tax" (set at 0.1% to 0.5% of the assessed value of the land) which replaced the individual income tax, land tax and charges for its use, property tax, 
transport tax and VAT.  To be eligible for this tax regime, peasant farms had to own land plots on 
the basis of property rights and/or land use rights.  Farms that chose to use this tax regime did not have to register as VAT payers.   
370.  The second tax regime was applied to juridical persons - producers of agricultural 
products.  To be eligible for the tax regime, juridical persons had to: (i) produce agricultural products and products of aquaculture with the use of land, process and sell these products of own 
production; and (ii) produce animal and poultry products (including breeding) in a full cycle of 
production (starting from rearing), products of  beekeeping and aquaculture (fish farming) and 
process and market these products of own production.  According to this regime, the VAT payable was determined normally, i.e., by the difference between the VAT charged in the price of product 
                                               
15 Peasant farm is a labour union of individuals exercising individual entrepreneurship that is inextricably 
linked with the use of agricultural land for agricultural production an d processing and marketing of their 
products.  The peasant farmers are citi zens of the Republic of  Kazakhstan engaged in en trepreneurial activities 
without forming a juridical person. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 84 - 
 
  sold and the VAT paid for inputs (works, servic es).  The amount of the VAT payable by the 
agricultural producers to the budget after sale of their products could be reduced by 70%, and as a result, they paid to the budget only 30% of VAT.  The price of these agricultural goods to the first 
purchaser/consumer, including food processing enterprises, incorporated the full 12% VAT.  
371.  Furthermore, the representative of Kazakhstan  noted that in the third tax regime, based 
on the provisions of Article 267 of the Tax Code, pr ocessors of agricultural primary products could 
also reduce the amount of the VAT payable to the budget by 70%, whereas, the price of final 
products to the first purchaser/consumer included the full 12% VAT.  To be eligible for the 
preference, agricultural processors had to receive not less than 90% of their aggregate annual income from carrying out the following types of businesses:  (i) production of meat and meat products; (ii) processing and canning of fruits and vegetables; (iii) production of vegetable and 
animal oils and fats; (iv) processing of milk and production of cheese; (v) production of flour and 
cereal products; (vi) production of ready fodd er for animals; (vii) production of bread; 
(viii) production of baby foods and dietetic nourishments; and/or, (ix) production of starch and 
molasses.  The representative of Kazakhstan note d that the preference was aimed at addressing 
the current social situation in the agricultural sector.  She explained that almost 97% of domestic agricultural producers that supplied their products to processors of agricultural primary products 
were small farmers and households with annual turn over of less than 30,000 MCI, i.e., they were 
not VAT payers.  This meant that in the absence of the preference, the processors would have to pay larger amounts of VAT than in the normal situation, because they had no VAT to deduct when they calculated the VAT payable to the budge t.  Thus, the VAT preference was aimed at 
compensating the losses of the processors incurred as a result of purchase of primary agricultural 
products from small farmers and househol ds not registered as VAT payers.   
372.  One Member expressed its concern that the scheme to provide revenue from VAT 
payments directly to the agricultural producers and processors at the time of the first sale to 
consumers might allow the producer or processor to charge less for his/her goods based on the expected subsidy.  This Member maintained that, as applied, it could operate as a discriminatory 
measure against imports.  This Member held the view that VAT preferences should either be 
eliminated or brought into conformity with WTO provisions. 
373.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that around 46% of Kazakhstan's 
population lived in rural areas and almost one third of the working population was engaged in 
agricultural production.  Along with this, over 93% of agricultural producers were households and 
small farms that lacked financial and technical resources.  Thus, existing VAT preferences for agricultural producers and processors played an important role in addressing social challenges and 
ensuring food safety, and as such formed an integral part of Kazakhstan's agricultural support 
system.  At the same time the Government of Kazakhstan planned to reform the VAT preferences for agricultural producers and processors by introducing alternative WTO compatible agricultural 
subsidy mechanism.  In this regard, the transiti onal period until 1 January 2018 was required to 
introduce amendments into the Tax Code with th e purpose to eliminate the VAT preferences and, 
thus, ensuring that the tax treatment for imported agricultural products was no less favorable than that applied to similar domestic goods, and develop a WTO compatible subsidy mechanism for 
agricultural producers.   
 - Excise Tax 
374.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the legal framework for excise taxation in 
Kazakhstan was provided in Section 9 of the Tax Code.  It set the list of products which were 
subject to excise taxes and established the tax rates (see Annex 14(B) of this Report).  Asked 
about the target date for unification of excise taxes (which for many years had been applied at 
higher rates on imported goods than on domest ic goods), she responded that, according to the 
Tax Code, excise taxes for domestic and imported goods had been fully unified as of 1 January 2012.   
375.  A Member requested more details on the taxable base for domestic and imported goods for 
the application of excise taxes.  This Member also sought more information on the process that 
had been used to unify excise taxes and asked Kazakhstan to provide a table listing all excise taxes currently applied.  If necessary, an implementation table for Kazakhstan's progressive 
unification of excise taxes where the rates of such taxes now differed as applied to domestic 
production or imported goods should also be pr ovided.  Moreover, this Member enquired whether WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 85 - 
 
  Kazakhstan's tax regime expressed (and collected) excise taxes in different currencies for 
domestically produced products and imports.  If this was the case, how did Kazakhstan ensure that exchange rate shifts did not result in different excise tax rates.  This Member also enquired 
whether the unified tax would be payable in local currency for all goods.  Finally, this Member 
considered that, to ensure their conformity with  Article III of the GATT 1994, the excise tax regime 
should not impose different currency requirements for taxes on domestic goods and on imports as payment of taxes in euro might result in less favourable treatment in terms of the actual revenue 
collected.  Some Members asked the representative of Kazakhstan to confirm that there were no 
additional excise tax exemptions, namely that excise tax was applied to all similar goods imported from all countries in a non-discriminatory manner.  Members emphasized that Kazakhstan should eliminate any remaining differential excise taxes from the date of accession to the WTO, i.e., it 
would unify all of its excise rates in terms of their application to domestic and imported goods or 
otherwise bring their application into conformity with the provisions of Articles I and III of the GATT 1994. 
376.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the taxable base for domestic goods for 
application of excise taxes was defined as the amount (volume or quantity) of excisable goods produced or sold in physical (measurement) units (Article 283 of the Tax Code).  The taxable base 
for imported excisable goods was defined as the volu me or quantity of imported excisable goods in 
physical (measurement) units (Article 297 of the Tax Code).  In general, excise taxes were applied to domestic goods upon their sale.  In accordance with Article 282 of the Tax Code, the date of sale was the date of unloading (transfer) of exci sable goods to the recipient.  Excise taxes on 
domestic goods, except for alcohol and tobacco products, had to be paid to the budget no later 
than the twentieth day of the month following the tax reporting period.  For goods imported from the territory of other EAEU members, except for alcohol and tobacco products, excise taxes had to 
be paid no later than the twentieth day of the month following the date of record of imported 
excisable goods.  Excise taxes on goods imported from third countries, except for alcohol and tobacco products, had to be paid when goods were crossing the customs border.  In case of 
alcohol (except for wine material and beer
 for which there was no requirement to apply strip 
stamps) and tobacco products, both imported and domestic, excise taxes had to be paid three days prior to the receipt of excise stamps from the tax authorities.  
377.  She further stated that according to the Tax Code,  as amended by Law No. 297-IV 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislativ e Acts on Issues of Customs Regulation and 
Taxation" of 30 June 2010, excise tax rates on spirits and alcohol beverages had been unified since 1 January 2012.  The excise tax rates on automo biles and fuel had already been unified since 
2009, on tobacco products since 2011.  She added that only motor vehicles with engine capacity 
over 3,000 cm
3 were subject to excise taxes.  This was aimed primarily at addressing 
environmental concerns and had no discriminatory effect on imports.  As of 2009, excise taxes 
were levied on all eligible goods, both domestically produced and imported, in the national 
currency (tenge).  She also confirmed that excise taxes were applicable to domestic and imported 
goods regardless of the country of origin.  Cu rrently applied excise taxes are listed in Annex 14(B) 
of this Report.   
378.  She further noted that Kazakhstan did not apply excise tax on imports of: (i) excisable 
goods imported by natural persons within the limits set by the Government; (ii) excisable goods required for the operation of vehicles involved in international transportation, en route and at 
intermediate stops; (iii) goods damaged prior to being transported across the customs border and 
rendered unusable as products and materials; (iv) goods imported for use (including personal use) by foreign diplomatic representative offices and offices of the same status, exempted from excise 
taxes under international agreements to which Kazakhstan was a party; (v) goods moving across 
the customs border of the EAEU and placed under the following customs procedures established by 
the customs legislation of the EAEU and the Repu blic of Kazakhstan:  customs transit, customs 
warehouse, processing on the customs territory, processing for domestic production, 
re-importation, duty-free trade, refusal of the g ood in favour of the State, destruction, free 
warehouse, free customs zone, except for the customs procedure release of goods for domestic consumption; and, (vi) products containing alcohol used in medicine (except for balm), registered 
in accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation.    
379.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to describe the customs regime of "duty-free trade" and 
explain why it allowed for the non-application of excise taxes on otherwise excisable goods citing 
the domestic or EAEU legislation that provided  for this treatment.  The representative of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 86 - 
 
  Kazakhstan replied that in accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 299 of the Tax Code of 
Kazakhstan, excisable goods imported to the EAEU were exempt from excise taxes if they were placed under customs procedures which provided fo r excise tax exemption in accordance with the 
customs legislation of the EAEU and/or the Re public of Kazakhstan, except for the customs 
procedure for release for domestic consumption.  In accordance with Article 302 of the CU 
Customs Code, duty-free trade was the customs procedure  under which goods were sold at retail 
duty-free shops to natural persons leaving the cust oms territory of the EAEU or foreign diplomatic 
representative offices, representative offices of international organizations equivalent to them, 
consular establishments as well as diplomatic agents, consular officials and members of their families living with them, without payment of cust oms duties and indirect taxes (VAT and excise 
taxes) and without application of any non-tariff measures.  Thus, all goods placed under this 
regime were exempt from pa yment of excise taxes.   
380.  A member asked Kazakhstan to provide information on efforts of the EAEU member States 
to gradually harmonize excise taxes.  The repr esentative of Kazakhstan explained that in 
accordance with the provisions of the EAEU Treaty, from 1 January 2015, the EAEU member States 
had to determine directions, forms and procedures of harmonization (approximation) of excise tax 
rates for the most sensitive excisable goods.  At the same time, the harmonization process should 
not lead to restriction of competition nor impede free movement of goods, works and services 
within the EAEU and its member States.  There was no specific deadline established for 
harmonization of excise tax rate s among the EAEU member States. 
381.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide information on the scope and nature of the excise 
tax increases, and the date when they would be implemented.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
explained that Law No. 152-V "On Amendments and Addenda to the Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Taxation " of 5 December 2013 (hereinafter: Law No. 152-V) 
envisaged gradual increase of excise tax rates for imported and locally produced tobacco and 
alcohol products on a uniform and non-discriminatory basis as provided in Table 2.  
Table 2:  Excise Tax Rates for Tobacco and Alcohol Products 
Types of tobacco products: 2014 (tenge /kg) 2015 (tenge/kg) 2016 (tenge/kg) 
Filter-tipped cigarettes 3000 3900 5000 
Non-filter cigarettes, smokables 3000 3900 5000 
Cigarillos 3700 4800 6225 
Cigars 475 620 565 
Tobacco 3800 4900 7345 
 
Types of alcohol products: 2014 (tenge/l) 2015 (tenge/l) 2016 (tenge/l) 
Alcohol products 1000 1200 1600 
Cognac, brandy from imported cognac 
spirits  250 250 250 Cognac, brandy from domestic cognac 
spirits 
382.  Asked about Kazakhstan's plans to introduce transport tax, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that according to the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, automotive 
vehicles were subject to transport tax based on engine size.  She noted that the transport tax was 
distinct from the excise tax.  She further explained that Law No. 152-V provided for an increase in 
tax rates for automotive vehicles with an engine capacity of more than 3,000  cm3, which was paid 
on an annual basis.  The Law had entered into force on 1 January 2014.  The following increased 
tax rates (in Table 3) were applied to automotive vehicles produced (manufactured or assembled) in the Republic of Kazakhstan and/or impo rted to the Republic of Kazakhstan after 
31 December 2013. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 87 - 
 
  Table 3:  Transport Tax 
No. 
  Tax rate 
(Monthly Calculation Index) 
1. Automotive vehicles with an engine capacity of:  
 over 3 000 to 3 200  cm3 inclusive 35 
 over 3 200 to 3 500 cm3 inclusive 46 
 over 3 500 to 4 000 cm3 inclusive 66 
 over 4 000 to 5 000 cm3 inclusive 130 
 over 5 000 cm3 200 
383.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply its domestic taxes and exemptions thereof, including VAT, excise taxes, and other 
taxes, in a non-discriminatory manner in compliance with Articles I and III of 
the GATT 1994, except for VAT preferences for agri cultural producers and processors described in 
paragraphs 370 and 371.  The Republic of Kaza khstan would bring these VAT preferences applied 
to agricultural producers and processors into co nformity with the WTO rules by 1 January 2018, as 
laid out in paragraph 373.  She added that during this period, the scope of the exemption would not be increased, either in terms of coverage or level of exemption.  The Working Party took note 
of this commitment. 
- Quantitative Import Restrictions, incl uding Prohibitions, Quotas and Licensing 
Systems 
384.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, as a result of the entry into force of the EAEU 
Treaty on 1 January 2015, the legal authority for the imposition of quantitative import restrictions 
in the Republic of Kazakhstan was based on Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third Countries" to the EAEU Treaty, which replaced the following legal acts:  the 
Agreement on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Re gulation in Respect of Third Countries of 
25 January 2008 (hereinafter: CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation), the Agreement on the 
Introduction and Implementation of Measures Co ncerning Foreign Trade in Goods, on the Common 
Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countri es of 9 June 2009, and the Agreement on the 
Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise Trade of 9 June 2009, which were terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  The following Decisions remained in force:  Decision No. 19 of the Interstate Council of the Eurasian Economic Community  (EurAsEC) "On 
Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 No vember 2009 (hereinafter: Decision of the 
EurAsEC Interstate Council No.19) and Decision  of the Collegium of the Eurasian Economic 
Commission No. 134 "On Normative Legal Acts in the Area of Non-Tariff Regulation" of 
16 August 2012 (hereinafter:   Collegium Decision No. 134).  As a consequence, decisions to apply non-tariff measures on third-country imports into the EAEU were taken by the Eurasian Economic 
Commission (hereinafter: EEC or Commission).  The EEC Collegium had re-approved the Common 
List of Goods that are Subject to Bans and Restri ctions on Importation and Exportation by Parties 
of the Customs Union of the Eurasian Economic Community in Trade with Third Countries (hereinafter - Common List) by Collegium Decision No. 134, which had come into force on 
16 September 2012 (see Annex 6 of this Report for the Common List).  Previously, the Common 
List had been approved by CU Commission Decision No. 132 "On Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation" of 27 November 2009.  From 1 January 2015, according to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU 
Treaty, non-tariff measures could include quantitative restrictions, bans, exclusive import licenses, automatic licenses (permits) or non-automatic licenses.  The non-tariff measures listed in Annex 6 
of this Report were comprehensive, and Kazakhstan did not have such additional restrictions in the 
national legislation. 
385.  Prior to the establishment of the CU, application of non-tariff measures was governed by 
Law No. 544-II "On Regulation of Trade Activity" of  12 April 2004.  This Law had been amended by 
Law No. 297-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Ce rtain Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Issues of Customs Regulation and Taxation" of 30 June 2010 and Law No. 400-IV 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues 
of Regulation of Trade Activity" of 26 January  2011, upon enforcement of the CU Agreements 
regulating non-tariff measures.  The repres entative of Kazakhstan noted that the 
EAEU member States did not apply non- tariff measures in mutual trade.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 88 - 
 
  386.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  in addition to goods that had been subject 
to non-tariff regulation in Kazakhstan prior to the establishment of the CU, the Common List had added the following goods:  certain products with encryption capabilities (goods containing encryption technology) and instruments for catching aquatic biological resources and skins of 
Greenland seals and baby seals.  Weak and medium  distillates, which had been subject to import 
licensing in Kazakhstan prior to establishment of the CU, were not included in the Common List, and hence were no longer subject to non-tariff regulation.  Finally, she noted that upon 
establishment of the CU, Kazakhstan's import ban on certain types of narcotic drugs and 
psychotropic substances and their precursors had been replaced by an import licensing regime.  
In response to a Member's question, she stated that Kazakhstan did not apply any prohibition on imports of second-hand clothes and tires.   
387.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that Government Resolution No. 681 
"On Bans Imposed on Goods and Vehicles Imported to and Exported from Kazakhstan, Lists of Goods Prohibited to be Placed under Certain Customs Regimes, and Bans and Restrictions for 
Conducting Operations with Goods Placed under Certain Custom Regimes" of 10 July 2003, 
banning imports of:  (i) military weapons and ammunition, materials and equipment which could be used in the production of weapons of mass destruction; (ii) certain kinds of narcotics, 
psychotropic agents and precursors, as well as instruments for their consumption; (iii) printed and 
illustrative materials aimed at creating propaganda for war, terrorism, violence, racism, as well as pornographic materials; (iv) certain ozone-de pleting substances; and (v) goods containing 
ozone-depleting substances, had been repeal ed by Government Resolution No. 272 of 
25 March 2011.  She added that a quota on imported grinding and forged spheres (imposed by 
Government Resolution No. 1243 "On Introduction of Restriction for Import And Export of Certain Goods" of 5 December 1998), and restrictions on imports of ethyl spirits and alcohol products 
(imposed by Government Resolution No. 1031 "On Import Licensing of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol 
Products in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of  27 June 1997) also had been abolished on 
1 January 2003 and 17 June 2004, respectively.   
- (a) Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas 
388.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan did not maintain any quantitative 
import restrictions, prohibitions or quotas within the meaning of Article XI of the GATT 1994, nor was any such measure in place in the EAEU.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
under the EAEU legislation, import restrictions could be applied pursuant to Part VII of Annex No. 7 
to the EAEU Treaty and in accordance with national laws and international treaties of Kazakhstan, if those measures were: (i) necessary to maintain public morals or law and order; (ii)  necessary 
to protect the life or health of citizens, environment, life or health of animals and plants; (iii) 
required to prevent the exhaustion of irre placeable natural resources and implemented 
simultaneously with curtailment of the domestic production or consumption associated with the 
utilisation of irreplaceable natural resources; (iv)  applied to protect cultural valuables and 
heritage; (v)  linked to a limitation of exports of domestic raw materials to provide sufficient quantity of such materials for the domestic manufacturing industry in periods when domestic prices for such materials were kept lower than world prices as the result of a stabilization plan 
implemented by the Government; (vi)  essential to  acquire or distribute goods in case of their 
general or local shortage; (vii)  essential to comply with the international obligations; (viii) essential to ensure the defence of the country and se curity of the State; (ix)  necessary to ensure 
regulatory legal acts not contravening international commitments and related to the application of 
the customs law, preservation of the environment,  protection of intellectual property and other 
legal acts; or (x) related to imports of gold or silver.  
389.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan  explained that pursuant to paragraph 12 of 
Part III of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, quantitative import restrictions could be introduced on agricultural or fishery products imported into the EAEU, in accordance with Article XI:2 of the GATT 1994, when such measures were necessary to: (i)  reduce the production or sale of 
similar domestic goods; (ii)  reduce the production or sale of domestic goods that could be directly 
replaced with imported goods unless there was a large-scale production of similar domestic goods; (iii)  remove from the market a temporary surplus of similar domestic goods by providing the 
available surplus of such goods to some groups of  consumers either free of charge or at prices 
lower than market prices; (iv)  remove from the market a temporary surplus of domestic goods that may be directly replaced with imported goods unless there was a large-scale production of 
similar domestic goods by providing the availabl e surplus of such goods to some groups of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 89 - 
 
  consumers either free of charge or at prices lower than market prices.  In addition, import 
prohibitions and restrictions could be applied if they were necessary for the application of standards or regulations for the classification, grading or marketing of commodities in international trade, as stated in paragraph 12.2 of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty.  In response to a question 
from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that "domestic good" in this context 
meant a good produced in any EAEU member State.  
390.  A Member enquired whether any import restrict ions on agricultural products under Article 
XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994 had been or were being applied.  This Member requested Kazakhstan to 
enter a commitment to comply with Article 4.2 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, which had superseded Article XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994, as from the date of its accession and to remove any measures that could be inconsistent with that Article.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said no import restrictions under Ar ticle XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994 were applied under 
the national legislation of Kazakhstan or Commission Decisions.  She further stated that in order to comply with Article 4.2 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, paragraph 12 of Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty did not contain a provision on import restrictions of agricultural products. 
391.  She further stated that, pursuant to Part II of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, the 
Commission was authorized to apply quantitative import restrictions and prohibitions to protect the 
external financial situation and safeguard the bala nce of payments.  To meet these obligations, the 
Commission was authorized to apply quantitative import restrictions or grant exclusive licenses to import or export based on proposals from the EAEU member State.  Such measures would be taken in accordance with the laws of Kazakhstan and the international agreements to which 
Kazakhstan was a party.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that the list of general exceptions stipulated in Part VII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty was exhaustive and no other document within the EAEU provided for such 
exceptions.  
392.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at, as of 1 January 2015, pursuant to Part II 
of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, the authority to impose non-tariff measures on third-country 
imports in the EAEU was transferred from the indi vidual EAEU member States to the Commission.  
A proposal to apply a non-tariff measure could be filed by an EAEU member State or the Commission.  The Commission was required to make its determination within 30 days from the date the proposal was submitted, and the decision would come into force within 45 days from the 
date of publication.  Any non-tariff measure wa s applied to goods originating in third countries, 
and applied equally to imports from all countries.  In response to a question from a Member, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that all ch anges to EAEU Treaty an d EAEU legislative acts 
(including the Common List) were published on th e EAEU website (www.eurasi ancommission.org).   
393.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
under Part X of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, an EAEU member State could unilaterally impose 
temporarily a non-tariff measure if such a measure was due to the reasons stipulated in 
paragraphs 388 and 389.  Furthermore, Part VIII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty provided further grounds to introduce unilateral non-tariff measures with a view to protecting the external financial position and safeguarding the balance of payments.  Such a unilateral measure could be 
imposed for only six months.  The EAEU member States not imposing the non-tariff measure were 
to take the necessary steps to prevent the impo rtation of the concerned goods into the member 
State which unilaterally applied the non-tariff measure. 
394.  Some Members stated that certain elements of Part VII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, 
such as paragraph 6, reached beyond grounds provided for under the GATT, in particular Articles XX and XI.  Those Members requested a commitment that Part VII of Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty, whether applied by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be in 
conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement.   
395.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, in her view, paragraph 6 of Part 
VII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty was in co nformity with Article XX(j) of the GATT 1994.  
She also confirmed that measures applied on the basis of that provision would be in conformity 
with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agre ement, whether applied by Kazakhstan or the 
competent bodies of the EAEU.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 90 - 
 
  - (b) Import Licensing 
396.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that as  of 1 January 2015, the licensing regime in 
Kazakhstan was governed by Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty and its Appendix, by Commission Decisions listed in paragraph 384 of this Report an d by Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty (TRQs).  
The purpose of the licensing regime was to monito r and control imports of goods which, for various 
reasons, were classified as sensitive by the EAEU member States and/or by the international community.  Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty and these Commission Decisions did not cover the 
issues of technical regulation, application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures, or anti-
dumping, safeguard and countervailing measures.  These issues were regulated by separate 
provisions of the EAEU Treaty and/or/ national legislation.  The procedure for importation of specific goods included in the Common List, such as goods containing encryption technology, ethyl 
spirits and alcohol products, etc. was set out in EAEU regulations and national legislation.  
The authorized body of each EAEU member St ate was responsible for issuing and monitoring 
implementation of non-automatic licenses and/or automatic licenses (permits). 
397.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the national legislation of Kazakhstan 
continued to apply to the extent that it did not contradict the EAEU Treaty, Commission Decisions and other EAEU legal acts.  Kazakhstan's national legislation in this area included: Law No. 214-III 
"On Licensing" of 11 January 2007, as amended by Law No. 400-IV "On Amendment and Addenda 
to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakh stan on Issues of Regulation of Trade Activity " 
of 26 January 2011 and Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of  Improvement of the Permission System" of 
15 July 2011 (hereinafter: Law-214-III); and Government Resolution No. 578 "On Certain Issues 
on Export and Import Licensing of Goods" of 12 June 2008, as amended by Resolution of the 
Government of Kazakhstan No. 1320 of 17 October 2012 (hereinafter: Government  Resolution 
No. 578). 
398.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that an import licence or permit authorized the 
licensee or permit holder to import the relevant goods into only the EAEU member State that 
issued the licence or permit; the licence or permit did not authorize the licensee to import the 
relevant goods into other EAEU member States.  She further explained that the licence or permit did, however, give the licensee/permit holder the right to transit the goods through the other EAEU 
member State's territory to the territory of the EAEU member State that issued the licence or 
permit.  
399.  According to Part IX of Annex No. 7 to the EA EU Treaty, licensing was required:  (i) in the 
event of temporary quantitative restrictions on impo rts of certain types of goods; (ii) to regulate 
the importation of certain goods for reasons of national security, health, safety or environmental 
protection; (iii) to grant an exclusive right to import certain goods; or, (iv) to carry out international obligations.  Import licenses were also required to regulate the importation of goods 
subject to tariff rate quotas.  The type of non-tariff restrictions and the list of goods subject to 
these restrictions were established by the Commission.  The current list of such goods is set out in Annex 6 of this Report.  The Commission could decide  to add or remove goods from this list upon 
request of an EAEU member State or on its own initiative. 
400.  The procedure for obtaining automatic and non-automatic import licenses (permits) was 
unified throughout the territory of the EAEU, including uniform licence and permit applications and forms, the list of documents to be submitted when applying for licence, the list of goods subject to 
import licensing, and the licensing procedures for each category of goods. 
401.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that according to Part IX of Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty, the "authorized State bodies of exec utive power" (hereinafter, in this Sub-section: 
authorized body) issued three types of non-automatic licenses:  one-time, general and exclusive 
licenses, as well as permits in case of automatic licensing.  In Kazakhstan, the "authorized body" responsible for granting the licence depended on the type of licence and goods subject to licensing.  The authorized bodies responsible for issuing import licenses are listed in Annex 6 of this Report. 
402.  One-time licenses were issued by the authoriz ed body of the Government of Kazakhstan to 
foreign trade participants on the basis of a foreign trade contract related to goods subject to import licensing and granted the right to import ce rtain types of goods in the quantity determined WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 91 - 
 
  by the licence.  A licence was issued for the quantity of goods specified in a foreign trade contract 
and was valid for up to one year from the date of it s entering into force.  Import licenses issued for 
goods subject to temporary quantitative restrictions were valid until the end of the calendar year for which a quota was established.  One-time licence holders had to submit to the authorized body 
a certificate of performance within 15 days after the expiration date of the licence.  
403.  General licenses were issued by the authorized body of the Government of Kazakhstan to 
foreign trade participants and granted them the right to import certain types of goods subject to 
licensing in the quantity determined by the licence.  According to CU Commission Decision No. 168 
"On Ensuring Functioning of the System of Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, Republic of Kazakhst an and the Russian Federation" of 27 January 2010 
(hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 168), only products described in Sections 2.9 (precious 
metals and precious stones), 2.10 (unpolished precious metals, scrap and wastes of precious 
metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals, and raw materials containing precious metals), 2.25 (goods subject to authorization procedures), an d 2.27 (goods subject to tariff rate quotas) of 
the Common List could be imported under a general licence as amended by Collegium Decision 
No. 134.  A general licence was valid for up to one year from the date of its entering into force and for goods subject to quantitative restrictions, a general licence was valid until the end of the 
calendar year for which a quota was established.  General licence holders had to submit to the 
authorized body a certificate of performance on a quarterly basis.  In response to a question, the 
representative of Kazakhstan noted that at this moment Kazakhstan did not issue any general licenses.   
404.  Exclusive licenses were issued by the author ized body of the Government of Kazakhstan 
for a period not exceeding the term established in a decision of the Commission and gave the applicant the exclusive right to import/export certain types of goods.  According to CU Commission 
Decision No. 168, exclusive licenses could be granted only for products in Section 2.26 (goods 
subject to exclusive rights) of the Common List, an d were issued consistent with the laws of the 
relevant EAEU member State.  In response to a question, the representative of Kazakhstan noted 
that Kazakhstan had not issued any exclusive licenses.   
405.  Pursuant to Part II of the Appendix to Annex No. 7 "Rules of the Issuance of Licenses and 
Permits to Export and/or Import Goods" to the EAEU Treaty, all types of non-automatic import 
licences were issued within 15 working days from the date of submission of the complete set of 
documents.  These documents consisted of an applic ation for a licence, an electronic copy of the 
application, a copy of the contract, a copy of the certificate confirming that the applicant was registered with a regional tax authority as a tax-payer, a copy of the activity licence (if applicable) 
and other documents, as required.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that other documents were specified in separate Regulations adopted by Collegium Decision No. 134, which merely repeated in content the Regulations approved by 
Decision No. 19 of the EurAsEC Interstate Council.  For instance, additional documents related to 
safety requirements for a limited number of specif ic goods were established in the Regulations, 
such as ozone-depleting substances, hazardous wastes, plant protection chemicals, special technical devices, etc.  Licenses had to be rene wed in cases of change of the legal form of the 
licence holder, change of name or place of regi stration or residence, or loss of the licence.  
Kazakhstan applied uniform import licensing fees for all goods.  According to the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax 
Code)" of 10 December 2008 (hereinafter: Tax Code), the licensing fee was equal to 10 Monthly 
Calculation Index  (MCI).  In 2014, the import/export licensing fee was equal to 18,520 tenge (approximately US$100). 
406.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that pursuant to Part III of the Appendix to 
Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, permits were issued without restriction to all applicants within three working days from the date of the submission of the draft permit in a format approved by CU 
Commission Decision No. 168, and remained valid until the end of the calendar year in which they 
were issued.  No other documents were required for issuance of a permit.  Application could be 
submitted on any working day before customs cleara nce.  The list of goods subject to permits was 
approved by the Commission (Section 2.25 of the Common List).  
407.  Non-automatic import licenses were issued by the Ministry of Investments and 
Development, except for import licenses for narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their precursors that were issued by the Ministry of In ternal Affairs; import licenses for ozone-depleting WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 92 - 
 
  substances that were issued by the Ministry of Energy; and import licenses for human organs and 
tissues, blood and its components that were issued  by the Ministry of Public Health and Social 
Development.  In accordance with CU Commission Decision No. 747 "On Amendments to Normative Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Non-Tariff Regulation in Relation to 
Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products" of 16 August 2011   (hereinafter:  CU Commission Decision 
No. 747), upon accession of any EAEU member State to the WTO, non-automatic import licensing requirements for spirits and alcohol products would be eliminated and replaced by automatic 
licensing requirement.  At this stage, however, all import licensing requirements for ethyl spirits 
and alcohol products had been eliminated in Kazakhstan as of 22 August 2012.  In case of application of the automatic import licence in the future, the "authorized body" would be the State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
408.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
proprietary and/or confidential information contained in an import licence application would be protected under the applicable laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
409.  A Member expressed concern that import licenses expired at the end of each calendar year 
and that importers could submit applications for renewal only as from the 15
th January of the 
following year and would thus face an up to six-week hiatus from supply due to renewal procedure 
as opposed to domestic producers that were not required to obtain an import licence.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that because Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty did not 
provide a separate procedure for the renewal of licenses, a licence holder wishing to renew a 
licence had to submit a new application, along with the full set of required documents and the 
same fee of 10 MCI.  An applicant could apply for a new licence at any time before the expiration 
of the current licence in order to avoid a disruption of supply of goods. 
410.  Part II of the Appendix to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty established the grounds for 
refusing licenses.  A licence could be refused on the following grounds:  (i) incomplete or 
inaccurate information in the documents submitted by the applicant to obtain a licence; (ii) non-compliance with the requirements stipulated in the Appendix to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU 
Treaty; (iii) termination or suspension of one or more documents that served as the basis for 
issuance of a licence; (iv) violation of international obligations of an EAEU member State, which could occur as a result of performance of the cont ract which required a licence; (v) exhaustion of 
quota (in the case of registration of a licence for goods subject to quotas); and (vi) in cases 
established by the Commission.  The decision to refuse a licence had to be justified and presented 
by the authorized body to the applicant in writin g.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed 
that licenses would not be refused due to minor documentation errors.  
411.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that a decision to terminate or suspend an import 
licence was made by the authorized body of Ka zakhstan based on the criteria established in 
CU Commission Decision No. 488 "On Approval of  the Provision on the Procedure of License 
Suspension or Termination" of 8 December 2010.  Pursuant to this Decision, the authorized body 
of Kazakhstan had the right to terminate or suspend an import licence in the cases stipulated by the Appendix to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, including a change in the constituent documents 
of a licensee registered as a juridical person (e .g., a change of the organizational/legal form, 
name, or its location) or a change in the passport information of a licensee registered as a natural 
person.  In such circumstances, the Appendix to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty provided that the 
licensee could request that the authorized body te rminate the existing licence and register a new 
licence.  In order to register a new licence, the licensee was required to submit a new application 
and documents confirming the abovementioned chan ge(s).  In case of loss of the licence, the 
licensee was entitled to a duplicate licence, which would be issued within three working days from 
the date of submission of the request explaining  the causes and circumstances of the loss of the 
licence.   
412.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in order to obtain an import licence for 
certain goods, the importer was required to have an activity licence.  Law No. 214-III  provided a 
complete list of activities subject to licensing.  Activity licensing requirements were established for: 
(i) national security reasons; (ii) implementation of State monopoly functions; (iii) strengthening the rule of law; or (iv) protection of the environm ent, property, and the life and health of citizens.  
Goods for which an activity licence was required in order to obtain an import licence are indicated 
in the last column of Annex 6 of this Report.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 93 - 
 
  413.  A Member noted that pursuant to Article 4.9 of Law No. 214-III, certain "State bodies", 
autonomous educational organizations and related foreign entities, and the Kazakhstan Development Bank were not required to have an activity licence for certain activities that would otherwise require one.  This Member asked if "State bodies" included State-owned or State-
controlled enterprises or if they were limited to official agencies of the Government of Kazakhstan 
and asked for an explanation as to why these exemptions existed, how the exempted potential licensees were otherwise regulated and if these exemptions provided discriminatory preferential 
treatment.  The representative of Kazakhstan  replied that these laws did not provide for 
preferential treatment for domestic entities with regard to activity licences required for obtaining import licences, nor did the exemptions cover activities involving imports or exports.   
414.  A Member asked if Article 40 of Law No.214-III authorized the requirements for import 
licences for goods under international agreements (e.g., the Convention on International Trade in 
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), Kimberley Process) and what specific circumstances were contemplated for the use of impo rt licences "for the purposes of protection of 
home manufacturers of the goods and economic sa fety of the Republic of Kazakhstan without 
application of quantity restrictions".  The repres entative of Kazakhstan explained that Law No.214-
III had been amended in accordance with the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Measures and now in 
accordance with Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty.  Specifically, Articles 39 and 40 had been 
excluded from Law No.214-III  by Law No. 400- IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain 
Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on  Issues of Regulation  of Trade Activity" of 
26 January 2011 (hereinafter: Law No.400-IV).  Goods subject to the international agreements 
(e.g., CITES, Kimberley Process) could be regulated according to Part VII of Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty.   
415.  Similarly, a Member expressed concern with Article 40 of Law No.214-III, which permitted 
introduction of import licenses "in order to protect domestic producers of the commodity", and 
such justification did not appear consistent with Kazakhstan's WTO obligations.  The Member asked Kazakhstan how it would bring its import licensing regime into compliance with the WTO rules.  
The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  Article 40 had been eliminated by Law No. 400-
IV.  She reiterated that Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty set forth the only reasons for which import licenses could be required.   
416.  Some Members expressed concerns that the current application of licensing requirements 
to products such as ethyl spirits and alcohol prod ucts, goods containing encryption technology, and 
special technical devices operated to restrict imports.  A Member requested that Kazakhstan explain how these restrictions would be modified or eliminated to comply with the 
WTO requirements.  In response, the representative  of Kazakhstan stated that the grounds upon 
which import licensing for those goods was introduced complied with the exemptions stipulated by Article XX of the GATT 1994.  In her view, the import licensing procedures had been brought into 
compliance with the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.   
- (i) Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products 417.  The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that since 1 January 2015, the importation 
into the Republic of Kazakhstan of ethyl spir its and alcohol products had been governed by 
Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty and Decisions listed in paragraph 384, as well as Kazakhstan's 
domestic legislation: Law No. 429-I "On State Regu lation of Production and Turnover of Ethyl 
Spirits and Alcohol Products" of 16 July 1999 (herei nafter:  Law No. 429-I) and Resolution of the 
Government of Kazakhstan No. 57 "On Certain Issues of Activity Licensing for Production of Ethyl 
Spirits and Production, Storage, Wholesale and/or Retail Sale of Alcohol Products Except for Storage, Wholesale and/or Retail Sale of Alcohol Products within the Territory of Production" of 
29 January 2013.   
418.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that, pursuant to CU Commission 
Decision No. 747 "On Amendments to Normative Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Non-tariff Regulation in Relation to Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products" of 16 August 2011 
(hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 747), upon accession to the WTO of any EAEU 
member State, non-automatic import licensing requirements for ethyl spirits and alcohol products (Section 2.18 of the Common List) would be eliminated and replaced by an automatic licensing 
procedure whereby licenses would be issued upon submission of the appropriate and complete 
documentation.  She further noted that pursuant to Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 94 - 
 
  Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republ ic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Improvement of 
Permission System" of 15 July 2011 amending Law No. 214-III, the requirements for an activity 
licence for importation of ethyl spirits and alcohol products, which was used as a condition for obtaining an import licence for ethyl spirits and alcohol products, had been eliminated as of 
30 January 2012.  As of 22 August 2012, non-automa tic licensing of imports of ethyl spirits and 
alcohol products was not applied in Kazakhstan in accordance with CU Commission Decision No. 747. She noted, however, that importers into Kazakhstan of ethyl spirits and alcohol products 
were still required to hold an activity licence for production, distribution, or storage of ethyl spirits 
and alcohol products, and to obtain and apply strip stamps for the purposes of excise tax payments, as described in Section "Application of Internal Taxes to Imports" of this Report.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Law 
No. 429-I would be amended to reflect the changes in licensing regime applied to imports of ethyl 
spirits and alcohol products  by the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.  In response to a 
question from another Member concerning licensing requirements for non-food products containing 
denatured alcohol, e.g., fuel mixtures, cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, paints and stains, 
the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at Law No. 429-I and EAEU legal acts did not 
regulate importation of these products.   
- (ii) Pharmaceuticals 
419.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that since 1 January 2015, the importation of 
medicines and pharmaceutical substances (hereinafter:  "pharmaceuticals) into Kazakhstan was regulated by Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, Decisions listed in paragraph 384, and more 
specifically by the Regulation "On the Order of Importation of Medicines and Pharmaceutical 
Substances to the Customs Territory of the Customs Union" approved by Collegium Decision No. 134 (hereinafter: CU Regulation on Import of Pharmaceuticals), Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On Public Health and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009 
(hereinafter:  Code No.193-IV) and Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 711 "On Approval of the Rules on Importatio n and Exportation of Medicines, Products of 
Medical Purposes and Medical Equipment" of 31 May 2012 (hereinafter: Government Resolution 
No.711).   
420.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to CU Commission Decision No. 748 
"On Amendments to the Regulations on the Order of Importation of Medicines and Pharmaceutical 
Substances to the Customs Territory of th e Customs Union" of 16 August 2011, as of 
1 October 2011, pharmaceuticals were no longer subject to an import licensing requirement.  Pharmaceuticals were, however, still subject to a registration requirement.  Pursuant to the CU 
Regulation on Import of Pharmaceuticals, only pharmaceuticals included in the national registries 
of pharmaceuticals of the EAEU member States could be imported into the EAEU.  The national registry of Kazakhstan was administered in accordance with the national legislation, and only 
pharmaceuticals registered in Kazakhstan (i.e., in accordance with Code No.193-IV) could be 
imported into the territory of Kazakhstan; non-registered pharmaceuticals could be imported only with a conclusion (permit) as described in paragraph 425.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan conf irmed that as described in paragraph 280 of 
Section "Registration Requirements for Import and Export Operations" of this Report, importation 
of pharmaceuticals was restricted to juridical pe rsons of Kazakhstan meeting the requirements of 
Article 80 of Code No.193-IV, which included holding an activity licence to engage in production or 
distribution of pharmaceuticals.   
421.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan's registration process was burdensome and constituted a 
problem for its exporters.  A major concern was that registration for imported products took about 
a year to renew, whereas a registration for lo cally produced generic products was renewed in 
about a month.  In addition, the renewal process required the same procedures as the original registration.  This Member asked how Kazakhstan would ensure that the import licensing procedures for pharmaceuticals would conform to WTO requirements.   
422.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that there could be no such 
discrimination under national legislation or EAEU legal instruments either in the process for the registration or re-registration of pharmaceuticals in Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Government 
Resolution No. 351 "On Approval of Standard of St ate Service 'State Registration, Re-registration 
and Introduction of Changes in Registration Record  of Medicines, Products of Medical Purpose and 
Medical Equipment'" of 4 April 2011, (i) State registration was conducted within 227 days; and, WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 95 - 
 
  (ii) State re-registration took 137 days.  For the procedure of re-registration, fewer documents and 
procedures were required.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan said that conditions for State registration and re-registration were identical for locally produced and imported pharmaceuticals in Kazakhstan.  The same list of documents was required in Kazakhstan 
for registration of locally produced and imported pharmaceuticals.  The term "simplified list of 
documents" did not exist in the legislation of Kazakhstan. 
423.  With regard to a concern raised by a Me mber on the renewal of registration, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, at present, the "Rules on State Registration, 
Re-registration and Introduction of Changes in Re gistration Record of Medicines, Products of 
Medical Purpose and Medical Equipment" (hereinafter in this Section:   Rules), approved by Order 
No. 735 of the Minister of the Public Health of Kazakhstan of 18 November 2009, envisaged 
simplification of one of the stages of re-registrat ion procedure, analysis and examination.  Analysis 
and examination were not required for pharmaceuticals marketed in Kazakhstan for over 15 years if the pharmaceuticals had received no complaint relating to their safety, quality and efficacy.  At 
the same time, a registration record of pharma ceuticals, produced in accordance with Good 
Manufacturing Practice (GMP), was prepared in the form of a common technical document consisting of 5 modules.  All 5 modules (1-5) were required for the State registration and 1-3 
modules were required for the State re-registration.  Therefore, fewer documents had to be 
submitted for re-registration.  Furthermore, the State Programme "On Developments of Pharmaceutical Industry for the Period of 2010-2014", approved by Government Resolution 
No.791 of 4 August 2010, envisaged implementation  of the GMP by pharmaceutical companies in 
Kazakhstan.  In addition, the State Programme of the Development of Public Healthcare "Salamatti 
Kazakhstan" (Healthy Kazakhstan), approved by Decree of the President of Kazakhstan No. 1113 
of 29 November 2010, envisaged accession of the national inspectorate to the Pharmaceutical 
Inspection Convention and Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme by 2015.  
Implementation of the goals stipulated in these programmes would allow Kazakhstan to introduce a one-time State re-registration procedure.  
424.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that information confirming that 
pharmaceuticals intended for importation were in the State registry had to be provided in the customs declaration.  Registration of medicinal products for medical purpose and medical equipment in the State registry was permitted only  after a review conducted to evaluate safety, 
effectiveness and quality of the medicine on the basis of an examination.  The list of 
pharmaceuticals currently registered could be found on the website of the National Center for Expertise of Medicines, Products of Medical Purpose and Medical Equipment:  
http://www.dari.kz/index.php? lang=eng&uin=1282274831.  
425.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that  non-registered pharmaceuticals could be 
imported only with a conclusion (permit) issued by the authorized body (the Ministry of Public 
Health and Social Development of Kazakhstan) for the purpose of:  (i) State registration; (ii) 
exhibitions without the rights to sell them afte rwards; (iii) life-saving treatment and rendering 
medical aid to patients having rare and/or seve re pathology; (iv) prevention and elimination 
consequences of emergency situations; (v) equipping organizations of public health service with 
unique medical equipment that had not been analogously registered in Kazakhstan; and, 
(vi) conducting clinical research as stated in Article 80.3 of Code No. 193-IV.  The list of documents required to obtain a conclusion (permit) for each of the above-stated categories of 
pharmaceuticals was provided in Government Resolution No. 711.   
426.  She noted, however, that pharmaceuticals (including non-registered pharmaceuticals) 
could be imported without a conclusion (permit) issued by the authorized body (the Ministry of 
Public Health and Social Development), if they we re imported for personal use by natural persons, 
diplomats or representatives of international organizations, as part of first-aid kits of vessels, international airlines, trains and vehicles arriving to the EAEU customs territory, or for medical aid to participants of international expeditions, cultural and sport events.   
427.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and thei r precursors (Section 2.12 of the Common List) 
were still subject to import licensing.  Importation into the EAEU customs territory of narcotic 
drugs, psychotropic substances and their precursors was regulated by the separate Regulation 
"On the Order of Importation, Exportation and Transit of Narcotic Drugs, Psychotropic Substances and their Precursors across the Customs Territory of the Customs Union", approved by Collegium WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 96 - 
 
  Decision No. 134.  According to the Regulation, juridical persons could import narcotic drugs, 
psychotropic substances and their precursors to the EAEU customs territory, provided they 
obtained a licence issued by the authorized body (the Ministry of Internal Affairs) in coordination with the Ministry of Public Health and Social De velopment.  Natural persons could import narcotic 
drugs and psychotropic substances as prescribed medicine for personal use in limited quantities.  
The following could be imported without licenses:  (i) narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their precursors intended for first aid in emergency situations, (ii) first-aid kits of vessels and 
international airlines, and, (iii) precursors used as supplies in quantity necessary for operation of 
equipment and technical devices of air, sea (river) and railway transport. 
- (iii) Products containing cryptographi c capabilities, including goods with  
  encryption technology an d special technical devices 
428.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that within the framework of the CU and 
EAEU, since 1 January 2010 imports of certain pr oducts containing cryp tographic capabilities 
(goods containing encryption technology, listed in Annex 15(A) of this Report) previously not 
subject to import licensing were now covered by the licensing regime and included in the Common 
List.  Special technical devices designed for the clandestine interception or extraction of information (listed in Annex 15(B) of this Report) were included in the Common List and remained 
subject to import licensing.  
429.  Some Members requested information on the application by Kazakhstan of requirements 
for importation of goods containing encryption technology.  These Members noted that most countries did not limit imports of these products and questioned the need and justification for 
licensing, in particular, non-automatic licensing of commercially traded, mass market goods, and 
goods that were covered under the Information Technology Agreement (ITA).  Members expressed concern that such licensing requirements could nullify or impair the market access commitments 
on a wide range of products undertaken by the Re public of Kazakhstan.  Members stated that to 
the extent that the Republic of Kazakhstan intended to establish or apply licensing requirements, such requirements should apply only to products  that clearly presented a threat to security.  
In such cases, licensing procedures should be applied in a non-discriminatory manner and comply 
with all WTO requirements. 
430.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, prior to 1 January 2010, the importation 
of goods containing encryption technology had only been subject to an activity licence, pursuant to 
Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 1160 "On Approval of Licensing Rules and 
Qualification Requirements for Activity in the Sphere of Development and Sale (including other Transfer) of Devices for Cryptographic Protection  of Information" of 30 November 2007, and no 
import licence had been required.  Currently, th e importation of goods containing encryption 
technology was regulated by Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, the Decisions listed in paragraph 384 of this Section, and the Regulation "On the Or der of Entry into the Customs Territory of the 
Customs Union and Removal from the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Encryption 
(Cryptographic) Means" (hereinafter: Encryption Re gulation), approved by Collegium Decision No. 
134.  She further stated that the Encryption Regu lation had been amended by Decision of the EEC 
Collegium No. 103 "On Amendments to the Regulation on the Application of Restrictions" of 
14 May 2013 with the purpose to include the definition of "mass market goods", as defined in 
Annex 15(C) of this Report.  A Member stated that the amendment to the Encryption Regulation in EEC Collegium Decision No. 103 narrowed the defini tion of "mass market goods" as defined in 
Annex 15(C) of this Report and introduced additional hurdles for products that qualified for mass 
market treatment.  It also created additional barriers that would affect the ability of goods covered by the Information Technology Agreement (ITA) to access the market.  This Member asked that 
these inconsistencies with the agreed definiti o n  b e  c o r r e c t e d  p r i o r  t o  c o n c l u s i o n  o f  t h e  
negotiations.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the CU Encryption Regulation had 
been amended by Decision of the Collegiu m of the EEC No. 103 "On Amendments to the 
Regulation on the Application of Restrictions" of 14 May 2013 with the purpose to include the 
definition of "mass market goods", as defined in Annex 15(C) of this Report.  
431.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at any procedures or requirements relating 
to licensing imports of goods containing encryp tion technology, whether by the Republic of 
Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be applied on a non-discriminatory 
basis and in conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, in particular, Articles I and III of the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs an d Trade 1994, and that procedures related to WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 97 - 
 
  the notification, evaluation, approval, and licensing of goods containing encryption technology, 
would be transparent and predictable and would not impose unreasonable or burdensome requirements on such goods.  The Workin g Party took note of these commitments.  
432.  In response to a concern raised by a Member that Kazakhstan's import licensing regime for 
goods containing encryption technology was now more restrictive than prior to the formation of 
the Customs Union, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, in order to facilitate trade, Kazakhstan and its EAEU partners had developed an d applied an interim system of regulation of 
goods containing encryption technology.  Unde r this interim system, all goods containing 
encryption technology were divided into three groups:  (i) certain goods containing encryption technology could be imported without any formalit ies related to encryption; (ii) other goods with 
encryption technology would be subject to a on e-time notification requirement; and, (iii) a 
category of goods with encryption technology woul d be subject to an expert evaluation and require 
an import licence.  The import licence was issued  by the Ministry of Investments and Development, 
based on a "conclusion" issued by the executive body  in the field of national security of the EAEU 
member State (the National Security Committee in the case of Kazakhstan), following an "expert 
examination".  She noted that other formalities, such as customs or those necessary to implement technical regulations, would continue to apply in respect of imports of all these goods. 
433.  In response to a request by a Member to clarify the meaning of the wording "without any 
formalities related to encryption" in the previous paragraph, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that such formalities were understood as the formalities concerning the goods listed in Annex 15(C) of this Report and described in the second and subsequent sentences of paragraph 435, and 
the formalities listed in paragraph 438 concerning the goods which were subject to import 
licensing and expert evaluation.  She further explained that "formalities" not related to encryption that could be applied to goods containing encrypti on technology could relate to the requirements 
resulting from application of the legislation on customs regulation, technical regulation, intellectual 
property rights, and other legal acts, which were usually applied with respect to the imported goods or goods designed for internal circulation in the market.   
434.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the conditions for importation of goods 
containing encryption technology, subject to current and any future exemptions, indicated in all of the Notes to Category 5, Part 2 "Information Security" of the Wassenaar Arrangement Dual Use List, whether imposed by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would not be more 
restrictive than those in effect on 1 June 2012.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
435.  With respect to goods falling into the categories set out in Annex 15(C) of this Report, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, within the framework of the interim system, any 
restrictions existing before 1 January 2010 would be eliminated and no new restrictions, such as expert evaluations, approvals, and licenses, for the importation of those goods would be adopted 
or applied, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU.  She further informed 
Members that within the framework of the interim system, importation of goods in the categories set out in Annex 15(C) of this Report would be permitted based on a one-time submission of a notification.  To comply with this requiremen t, the manufacturer of the goods would submit a 
completed paper copy of a form containing information specified in Annex 15(D) of this Report.  
Further, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that no licenses would be required, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the EAEU, for imports into Kazakhstan of goods 
containing encryption technologies included in Annex 15(C) of this Report, and the exemptions set 
out in paragraph 434.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
436.  Addressing a request from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all 
goods with encryption technology released by fu ture Wassenaar Arrangement Category 5, Part 2 
"Information Security" de-controls would be allowed to be imported "without any formalities related to encryption".  Goods subject to a noti fication requirement, in accordance with the 
preceding paragraph were listed in Annex 15(C) of this Report.  In response to a question from a 
Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, consistent with Wassenaar practice, the 
regulating country (Kazakhstan) would determine which goods qualified as "mass market goods", as defined in Annex 15(C) of this Report.  She added that the data to be submitted for a "one-time 
notification" application were listed in Annex 15(D) of this Report.  She confirmed that, if a good 
had been imported subject to the "one-time notification" process, that good would not be subject to any other notifications by any parties importing that good.  The information on goods approved WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 98 - 
 
  for import through the "one-time notification" process would be available to the public on the 
websites of the National Security Committee of Kazakhstan and the EAEU. 
437.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that, if proprietary information was submitted in the notification, and the manufacturer identified 
that information as proprietary, that information would be protected.  Confirmation of notification 
would be automatic, unless the manufacturer or its authorized representative in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was contacted within ten working days after submission of the notification regarding 
its compliance with the requirements, including whether the product was correctly subject to 
notification, set out in paragraph 435.  In the Republic of Kazakhstan, the National Security Committee would maintain a public internet site where such confirmations would be posted; the EAEU would also maintain a public internet site wh ere this list would be available to the public.  
Any importer or shipper could rely on a relevant confirmation.  Once a good was notified and 
confirmed, that good would not be subject to any other notifications by any parties importing that 
good; rather an importer/shipper would be required to indicate only that the good appeared on the 
internet site in the relevant customs declaration.  She further explained that this notification 
procedure was intended to facilitate the entry of the goods listed above and would not result in any delays or additional approval procedures. 
438.  For goods containing encryption technology  t h a t  n e e d e d  a n  i m p o r t  l i c e n c e ,  t h e  
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, within the framework of an interim system, such goods would need to undergo expert evaluation and approval (conclusion) only once.  If an expert 
evaluator needed additional information for its evaluation, it was required to notify the 
manufacturer or its authorized representative in the Republic of Kazakhstan and request such 
information within ten working days of the application.  Manufacturers would not be obligated to submit source code and failure to submit such code alone, would not result in denial of an 
application.  After the good was approved, the same good, or a good used for the same purpose 
with identical encryption, could be imported into the Republic of Kazakhstan with a licence issued in a manner consistent with Article 2 of the WT O Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  
The time period for completing import licensing procedures, including the time required to obtain 
an experts' evaluation, to receive approval and th e import licence, would not exceed three months.  
Fees for experts' evaluations and licensing wo uld be transparent and based on the costs of 
services rendered.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
439.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would engage interested 
Members in a review of the operation of this interim system.  The purpose of this review would be to clarify and refine procedures for notification, confirmation, and licensing of goods with 
encryption technology and, where possible, to further improve and expand the products covered 
under paragraph 434 and Annex 15(C) of this Report.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
440.  To obtain an import licence, along with the standard set of documents indicated in the 
Appendix to  Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, an applicant had to submit to the authorized body a 
conclusion (described in paragraph 438) issued  by the National Security Committee on the 
permissibility of importing the specific encryption product.  Pursuant to the Encryption Regulation, 
in order to obtain a conclusion, an applicant had to submit to the National Security Committee an 
application for a conclusion on the import of a cryptographic device, indicating the product's full name and identifying characteristics such as model name and serial number; a copy of the 
required activity licence; technical documentation on the encryption device; and if requested, a 
sample of the encryption device.  The National Security Committee conducted a technical analysis of imported devices to determine only if the product contained cryptographic capabilities, and 
issued a document with its expert conclusion.  
441.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the procedure for technical analysis and 
obtaining the import and activity licenses for goods containing encryption technology did not require an applicant to disclose its confidential bu siness information, including the source code of 
the product.  The submission of a product sample was not mandatory.  In practice, most of the 
approvals were made on the basis of detailed description of the product's non-secret technical characteristics.   
442.  Members of the Working Party thanked Kazakhstan for reporting this change, but noted 
that this was a more restrictive system than had previously been in place.  They expressed WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 99 - 
 
  concern about how Kazakhstan would ensure that goods not containing encryption technology 
would be excluded from any requirements relating to importation of goods containing such technology.  In their view, goods that did not contain encryption technology should not be subject to any encryption-related requirements or formalities.  Further, Kazakhstan should not require an 
activity licence for the importation of encryption goods subject only to notification requirements.   
443.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that goods that did not contain encryption 
technology would not be subject to any encryption-related requirements or formalities.  
She further confirmed that activity licenses would not be required as a condition for importation of 
goods that were not subject to requirements or fo rmalities related to encryption and goods subject 
only to notification requirements.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
444.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
the importation of special technical devices (STDs) (Section 2.17 of the Common List) was 
regulated by  Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty and Decisions listed in  paragraph 384 of this 
Section, including the Common List approved by Collegium Decision No. 134 and in particular, the 
Regulation "On the Order of Importation to th e Customs Territory of the Customs Union and 
Exportation from the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of the Special Technical Devices Designed for the Clandestine Interception or Extr action of Information" approved by Collegium 
Decision No. 134.  The list of STDs subject to import licensing was contained in Annex 15(B) of 
this Report.  EAEU legal instruments regulating the licensing of STDs superseded Kazakhstan's national legislation.  STDs were defined as special software and technical products containing hardware or software features desi gned only for the clandestine interception or extraction of audio, 
video and other information as well as devices designed to detect the technical channels of leakage 
of information.  In response to a Member's question, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that STDs differed from cryptographic devices by their intended purpose and use.  Cryptographic 
devices were designed to protect confidential information whereas STDs were designed to obtain 
information clandestinely.  She further confirmed th at devices designed for open use, but which as 
a result of modification, unintended use, or some other way, could be used for clandestine 
interception of information, for example voice recorders or normal surveillance cameras, were not 
considered to be STDs. 
445.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, from the date of accession, quantitative 
restrictions on imports, such as quotas, bans, permits, prior authorization requirements, licensing 
requirements or other requirements or restrictions having equivalent effect that could not be 
justified under the provisions of the WTO Agreement would be eliminated and not introduced, re-introduced or applied, whether by the Republic  of Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the 
EAEU.  From the date of accession, any such requ irements or restrictions on imports, whether 
applied by the Republic of Kazakhstan or th e competent bodies of the EAEU, would be in 
conformity with the provisions of the WTO Agre ement.  She confirmed that the administrative 
procedures of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the operation of its import licensing regime and their 
application would, from the date of accession, be in compliance with all relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the WTO Agreement on  Import Licensing Procedures.  The Working 
Party took note of these commitments.  
- Customs Valuation 
446.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the basic provisions relating to customs 
valuation principles and policies in Kazakhstan were contained in the Agreement on the 
Determination of Customs Value of Goods, Transferred Across Customs Border of the 
Customs Union of 25 January 2008 (hereinafter: CU Agreement on Customs Valuation), the Treaty 
on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of  27 November 2009 (hereinafter - CU Customs 
Code) and Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter: Customs Code of Kazakhstan).  The CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and the CU Customs Code had entered into force in Kazakhstan on 1 July 2010.  These legal instruments remained in force after 1 January 2015.  Prior to 
1 July 2010, customs clearance and control in Kaza khstan, including customs valuation, had been 
carried out in accordance with the national legislation, mainly the former Customs Code of Kazakhstan No. 401-II of 5 April 2003.  The CU Agreement on Customs Valuation specified those 
areas that were implemented through national legislation.  In other cases, the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation applied directly as law.  Provisions of Code No. 155-II "On Administrative Offences" of 30 January 2001 and Law No. 221-III "On Order of Review of Requests of Natural and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 100 - 
 
  Juridical Persons" of 12 January 2007 (hereinafter – Law No. 221-III) related to customs valuation 
also continued to apply after 1 July 2010.   
447.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, as provided in Article 1.3 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, the relevant provisions of the CU Agreements and national 
legislation were based on the provisions of the WTO Agreement on the Implementation of 
Article VII of the GATT 1994 (hereinafter: WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation) and that, in her view, the CU Agreement on Customs Valuatio n had been drafted to fully implement the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  All six methods of customs valuation applied were based 
on the provisions of Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, including most of the provisions of the Interpretati ve Notes.  The rest of the Interpretative Notes 
were incorporated in EAEU legal instruments.  The provisions of Articles 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 16 
of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation were also implemented in EAEU legal instruments 
and Kazakhstan's national legislation.  She noted, in particular, that in accordance with Article 2 of the CU Customs Code, the term "customs territory of importation", as defined in Article 15.2 of the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, was the customs territory of the EAEU, consisting of the 
territories of the EAEU member States, as well as artificial islands, installations and other objects located beyond the territory of the EAEU member States in respect of which those 
EAEU member States enjoyed exclusive jurisdicti on.  Article 3 of the CU Agreement on Customs 
Valuation confirmed that goods "produced" in the customs territory (including identical or similar goods) included those extracted, raised, or manufactured, as defined in Article 15.1 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  She stated that the term used in Article 3 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, i.e., that these goods belonged to "one or the same group of 
goods or a line of commodities, including identical and similar goods, which are manufactured within the framework of a certain economic acti vity", was based on th e meaning of the term 
"goods of the same class or kind" set out in Article 15.3 of the WTO Agreement on 
Customs Valuation.  She further added that terms such as identical goods, similar goods, and related parties were used as described in Article 15 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, 
and their definitions could be found in Article 3 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.   
448.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the customs value of goods imported to the 
EAEU customs territory was declared by a declar ant when submitting a customs declaration of 
goods as provided for in the Agreement on the Declaration Order of the Customs Value of Goods 
Transferred through the Customs Border of the Customs Union of 12 December 2008, and 
Article 65 and Chapter 27 of the CU Customs Code.  The Agreement on the Declaration Order of the Customs Value of Goods Transferred through the Customs Border of the Customs Union of 
12 December 2008 was terminated as of 1 January 2015.  The importer declared the customs 
value of imported goods by providing the following information: (i) the method chosen by the declarant for customs valuation of imported goods; (ii) the customs value of goods; (iii) conditions 
and circumstances surrounding the transaction related to the customs valuation of goods; and 
(iv)documents confirming such information.  Th e representative of Kazakhstan noted that the 
customs value of imported goods was determined in accordance with six methods listed in the priority order: (i) transaction value; (ii) transaction value of identical goods; (iii) transaction value 
of similar goods; (iv) deductive method; (v) co mputed method; and, (vi) fall-back method, as 
provided for in Articles 4 and 6 to 9 and 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  The customs value of imported goods was as much as possible based on the price of transaction 
with these goods as provided in Article 2 and Article 4 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, 
which established that the "customs valuation of imported goods shall be, as a matter of principle, based on the price of transaction with these goods" and "the customs value of goods imported to 
the customs territory of the EAEU was the price of the respective transaction, i.e., the price 
actually paid or payable for these goods sold for export to the country of importation to the customs territory of the EAEU".  The customs valu e of goods and the information related to their 
valuation were based on reliable and computable data and supported by documentary evidence.  
The procedure of customs valuation was universal, i.e., did not differ depending on the source of 
goods (country of origin, type of goods, participants of a transaction, etc.).  
449.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the transaction value method established the 
customs value of goods on the basis of the price actually paid or liable to be paid for these goods 
at their sale for importing to the EAEU customs te rritory, and had priority over other methods of 
customs valuation.  She further noted that the methods of valuation provided for in the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation other than the transaction value were contained in 
Articles 6 to 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Va luation.  She further explained that Article 10 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 101 - 
 
  of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and Article 107 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
provided for the use of the fall-back method.  If the customs value of the imported goods could not be determined under the provisions of Arti cles 4 and 6 to 9 of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation (Articles 101 to 106 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan), the customs value 
would be determined using reasonable means consistent with the principles and provisions of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
450.  The methods of customs valuation used under the fall-back method were provided by 
Articles 101 to 106 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan and were consistent with the provisions of 
Articles 4 and 6 to 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, and Article 7 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  The use of the fall-back method of customs valuation of goods was described in Article 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and was the same as 
the other methods; however, it could be app lied with some flexibility,  for example: 
- determination of customs value could be based on the transaction value of identical or 
similar goods produced in the country other than the country of production of the goods 
being valued;  
- in determining customs value using the transaction value of identical or similar goods, a 
reasonable flexibility was allowed in respect of the interpretation of the requirement of 
Articles 6 and 7 of the CU Agreement on Cu stoms Valuation and Articles 103 and 104 of 
the Customs Code of Kazakhstan that the identical or similar goods should be exported at or about the same time as the goods being valued, as a rule, up to 90 days;  
- customs values of identical or similar imported goods already determined under the 
provisions of Articles 8 and 9 of the CU Ag reement on Customs Valuation and Articles 105 
and 106 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan could be used in determining customs value; and, 
- in determining customs value using the de ductive method, the "90 days" requirement 
established by paragraph 3 of Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and 
paragraph 3 of Article 105 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan could be administered 
flexibly (in accordance with the Interpretative Note to Article 7.3(c) of the WTO Agreement 
on Customs Valuation). 
451.  At the same time, customs valuation of goods using the fall-back method could not be 
based on the following:  (i) the price of goods in the internal market of the EAEU produced on the 
territory of the EAEU; (ii) the system of choos ing for customs purposes the higher price from 
two alternatives; (iii) the price of goods in the do mestic market of the exporting country; (iv) costs 
other than those included in the estimated cost determined for identical or similar goods in the 
computed method; (v) the price of goods delivered from the exporting country to third countries; 
(vi) minimum customs value; and (vii) arbitrary or fictitious customs value.  
452.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that, pursuant to 
Articles 68 and 69 of the CU Customs Code, if th e customs officer discovered signs suggesting that 
the information on the customs value of the goods stated by the declarant could contain inaccurate details, the customs officer could perform additional measures of control, including inspection of the documents and/or goods.  Release of the goods was permitted by customs bodies on condition 
of presentation of a guarantee of the dutiable paym ents and taxes.  Pursuant to Article 1.2 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and Article 113 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, these 
payments included:  (i) import customs duty; (ii) export customs duty; (iii) value-added tax levied 
upon importation of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; (iv) excise tax levied upon 
importation of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; and, (v) customs fees (fees for 
customs declaration, escort or preliminary decision ).  For confirmation of the stated information, 
the declarant, upon request of the customs body, provided additional documents, information and 
explanations.  She further added that the declar ant had the right to prove the correctness of the 
selected method of determination of the customs value of the goods and the authenticity of the 
information presented to the customs body.  In cases when the transaction value was rejected, the 
customs body proposed to the declarant that the customs value of the goods be determined by 
using another method.  In such situations, the customs body and the declarant could hold consultations with regard to the method applicab le for determination of the customs value of the 
goods.  Notably, the customs value was dete rmined by the customs body by proceeding 
sequentially through the methods of determination of the customs value of the goods, as confirmed in Article 2 of the CU Agreement on Cust oms Valuation.  She also noted that the current 
legislation of Kazakhstan did not envisage the adop tion of any preliminary decision, i.e., advanced WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 102 - 
 
  ruling regarding customs value.  The customs valu e of the goods was determined by the declarant 
and declared to the customs body at the instance of the goods declaration.  
453.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, where the exchange of currency was 
necessary for the determination of customs value, th e official exchange rate effective on the day of 
registration of the customs declaration by the customs body was to be used, unless otherwise 
provided by the Customs Code and/or international treaties of the EAEU member States.  Pursuant to Article 78 of the CU Customs Code for the ca lculation of customs duties and taxes and the 
determination of customs value, the customs bo dy of the relevant EAEU member State was 
required to use the exchange rate established in accordance with the national legislation of this 
EAEU member State.  According to Article 56 of Law No. 2155 "On the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995, the Na tional Bank of Kazakhstan established and 
published the official exchange rate of fore ign currencies with respect to the tenge.  
This information could be accessed on the we bsite of the National Bank of Kazakhstan 
(www.nationalbank.kz).   
454.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to Article 64 of the CU Customs 
Code, the legal framework for customs valuation of exported goods had to be implemented in 
accordance with the national legislation of EAEU member States.  In Kazakhstan, this issue was 
regulated by Article 98 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  
455.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to amend the legislation of Kazakhstan to remove the 
provision allowing the use of reference books that enforced minimum values for certain imports.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the use of information reference books for the 
purposes of customs valuation of goods had been discontinued under the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, the CU Customs Code and the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
456.  Asked about the existing procedures for judicial review of customs measures, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that Code No. 155-II "On Administrative Offences" had been 
adopted on 30 January 2001.  This Code governed procedures for disputes related to customs valuation, as well as cases involving deliberate evasion of customs duties and taxes.  
Bodies authorized to address cases of administrative violation and the imposition of sanctions were 
appointed according to this Code. 
457.  Concerning the right of appeal, she said th at Article 9 of the CU Customs Code and 
Article 17 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan provid ed for the right of appeal and stated that any 
person had the right to appeal against decisions made by the customs bodies, actions (inactions) 
of the customs body or its officials in accordance with procedures and time-frames established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Article 12 of Law No. 221-III, the 
decisions of authorities (State and local Govern ment bodies), and the actions (inactions) of 
officials, could be appealed to a senior official.  In cases where there was no senior official, or where the appellant did not agree with the decisi on of the senior official, the appellant could 
appeal directly to the court without exhausting all avenues of administrative appeal.  This principle 
was also confirmed in Article 278 of Code of Civil Procedure of Kazakhstan No.411-I of 13 July 1999.  The general time-frame for processing appeals to a senior official was described in paragraph 459 of this Report.  In this case, appeals had to be resolved in the court within one 
month, as stipulated in Article 174 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Kazakhstan.  Thus, importers 
could appeal against decisions made by the custom s body to a senior customs official or to the 
court.  No penalty was attached to the choice to appeal.  
458.  Confidentiality requirements (Article 10 of  the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation) 
were provided in Article 8 of the CU Customs Code.  According to Article 8, any information 
received by the relevant customs body in accord ance with the customs legislation of the EAEU 
and/or legislation of an EAEU member State was to be used by the customs bodies solely for 
customs purposes, including prevention of administrative offences and violations of laws.  Customs bodies, their officials and other persons granted access to such information had no right to disclose, use for personal purposes, or pass to third parties, including state bodies, information 
which constituted State, commercial, bank, tax or other secret information protected by law, and 
confidential information, except for the cases prov ided by the Customs Code and/or the legislation 
of the relevant EAEU member State.  Pursuant to Article 16 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, 
information received by the customs body in acco rdance with EAEU legal acts and the national 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan was used by customs officials exclusively for customs WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 103 - 
 
  purposes, and would not be disclosed or dissemina ted, even to state bodies, except when the 
transfer of such information to other state authorities was necessary for law enforcement and for judicial proceedings in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
459.  Concerning the transparency and publicatio n requirements of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Article 10 of the CU Customs Code 
provided for dissemination of information on CU customs agreements and other legal acts by publishing all EAEU acts on customs legislation in  official and other periodicals and by means of 
television and radio, with the use of information technologies and other means of information 
dissemination.  The Commission and each EAEU member State's customs body had to provide free access to information on EAEU legal acts relating to customs matters, including publication on their official websites: www.eurasianco mmission.org and www.customs.kz.  Relevant information had to 
be also disseminated at various border checkpoints; airports, railway and car terminals, as well as 
seaports; on the board of vehicles, as well as aircraft and marine vessels involved in international traffic; and in customs control zones.  The State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of Finance of 
Kazakhstan provided information on relevant customs-related legislation and foreign trade 
statistics on its website, www.customs.kz and in the periodicals "Official Gazette", "Zan", "Keden" 
and "Customs Bulletin".  All documents that had a binding character were published on the official 
website of the State Revenue Committee.  Purs uant to Article 11 of the CU Customs Code, 
customs officials were available to provide explanations ("consulting") on the provisions of the customs legislation and other issues within the competence of the customs body, both in person and in writing.  Upon written request from an  interested party, the customs body provided 
information in writing in the shortest term possible, but no later than the term established by the 
legislation of the relevant EAEU member State.  Consultations on how to complete the documents 
to be submitted to the customs bodies had to be given by customs officers orally, without 
reviewing the information provided by the intere sted person.  According to Article 8 of Law 
No. 221-III requests of natural and juridical persons, which did not need the customs official to obtain information from other state bodies or their officials, had to be reviewed within 15 calendar 
days.  Requests that required a customs official to obtain information from other state bodies and 
their officials had to be reviewed within 30 calendar days.  The term could be prolonged for no more than 30 calendar days.  
460.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  pursuant to Article 11 of the CU Agreement 
on Customs Valuation, if there was a need to postpone the decision with regard to customs 
valuation of certain evaluated (imported) goods, the declarant was permitted to take the goods, when necessary, by providing sufficient guarante e of payment of the applicable customs duties 
and taxes on such goods in accordance with the le gislation of the EAEU.  Surety bond (warranty) 
provisions were covered by Chapter 12 of the CU Customs Code and Chapter 16 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  Customs bodies had the right to release the goods conditionally, as long as 
customs duties, taxes and fees were secured in the amount of the customs payment determined 
by the customs bodies on the basis of available pr ice information.  Guarantees could take the form 
of (i) cash; (ii) bank guarantees; (iii) surety; (iv) mortgage; or, (v) insurance contracts.  The payer had the right to choose any of the ab ove-mentioned means of ensuring the customs 
payment (taxes and duties).  Pursuant to Arti cle 113 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, these 
payments included import customs duty; export  customs duty; value-added tax levied upon 
importation of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; excise tax levied upon importation 
of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan ; and customs fees (fees for customs declaration, 
escort, or preliminary decision).  In 2011, 0.2% of customs entries into Kazakhstan had made use 
of this provision.  The term of the guarantee had to be sufficient to allow for the timely submission 
by the customs body of a request to the declaran t to fulfil the obligation owed to the customs 
body, to which such guarantee had been granted.  Pursuant to Article 156 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, a deposit would be refunded, within 10 working days of receipt of the request, when the commitments of the declarant before the custom s body were fulfilled.  The request could be 
submitted no later than five years after the commi tment had been fulfilled.  She further added that 
guarantees of payments of customs duties and taxes were required in certain cases prescribed by the CU Customs Code and by other customs legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including 
the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  In particular, this included the following cases: 
- transportation of goods in accordance with the procedure of customs transit; 
- if goods were put under the customs procedur e of processing of goods beyond the customs 
territory; 
- conditional release of goods; and, WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 104 - 
 
  - change of time-frames for payment of customs du ties and taxes, if international treaties or 
legislation of the EAEU member States provided for that.  
461.  Members expressed concern regarding the treatment of related parties and noted in this 
regard that Article 4.4 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation required the imported good in 
such cases to meet certain price benchmarks.  This did not appear to be consistent with either 
Interpretative Note 1 to Article 1.2(a) and (b ) of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation or 
with Article 4.3 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.   
462.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Article 4.3 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, the fact that  the buyer and the seller were related should 
not in itself be grounds for regarding the transaction value as unacceptable.  In such case, the circumstances surrounding the sale should be examined.  If, on the basis of information presented 
by the declarant or received by the customs bodies  by other means, signs that such relationship 
had influenced the price were discovered, the cu stoms bodies should inform the declarant in 
written form about such signs.  The declarant was then entitled to demonstrate to the customs 
bodies that the relationship did not influence the price.  She also noted that, in a sale between 
related persons, the transaction value also should be accepted whenever the declarant 
demonstrated that such value closely approximated one of the following occurring at or about the 
same time: 
- the transaction value in sales to unrelated buyers of identical or similar goods for export to 
the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
- the customs value of identical or similar goods as determined under the provisions of 
Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation; or, 
- the customs value of identical or similar goods as determined under the provisions of 
Article 9 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation. 
463.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Articles 4.3 and 4.4 of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation had been amended by the Pr otocol on Amendments and Addenda to the 
Agreement on the Determination of Customs Value of Goods, Transferred Across Customs Border 
of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008 (hereinafter: Protocol) , which had been provisionally 
applied from the date of its signature, 23 Apr il 2012, and ratified by Law of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 109-V "On Ratification of Protocol on Introduction of Amendments and Addenda to the Agreement on the Determination of Customs Value of Goods, Transferred Across Customs 
Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008" of 21 June 2013.  She further noted that 
pursuant to Decision of the Interstate Council of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) No. 86 "On Entering into Force of the Protocol on Amendments and Addenda to the Agreement on 
the Determination of Customs Value of Goods, Transferred Across Customs Border of the 
Customs Union of 25 January 2008", the Protocol had entered into full force as of 10 October 2014.  Pursuant to the Protocol, declarants were provided an opportunity to 
demonstrate two different means of establishing the acceptability of a transaction value:  
examination of the circumstances surrounding the sale and demonstration by the declarant that 
the transaction value closely approximated a "tes t value" previously accepted by the customs 
body. 
464.   The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Articles 4.3 and 4.4 of the 
CU Agreement on the Determination of Customs Value of Goods, Transferred Across Customs Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008 would be modified prior to the date of 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO to ensure th eir consistency with the provisions of the WTO 
Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of th e GATT 1994.  Declarants would be provided an 
opportunity to demonstrate two different means of establishing the acceptability of a transaction 
value:  examination of the circumstances surrounding the sale and demonstration by the declarant 
that the transaction value closely approximated a "test value" previously accepted by the customs body.    The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
465.  Members also expressed concern that the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, the 
CU Protocols, and national implementing legislation all appeared to lack a provision for the 
acceptance of paragraph 2 of Decision No. 4.1 of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation "On the Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software for Data Processing Equipment", which 
provided that the valuation of carrier media bearing software for data processing equipment 
should be based on the value of the media, and Decision No. 3.1 "On the Treatment of Interest WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 105 - 
 
  Charges in the Customs Value of Imported Goods".  Moreover, a Member noted that Kazakhstan 
had not fully implemented the Interpretative Notes in domestic legislation.  Members sought information from Kazakhstan on how these issues would be addressed in EAEU legal instruments or Kazakhstan's national legislation.   
466.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  Article 4.7 of the CU Agreement on Customs 
Valuation corresponded to the provisions of Decision No. 3.1 of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation "On the Treatment of Interest Charges in the Customs Value of Imported 
Goods", which provided that the amount of interest charges would not be included in the customs 
value.  She added that the provisions of para graph 2 of Decision No. 4.1 of the Technical 
Committee on Customs Valuation "On the Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software, for Data Processing Equipment" were included in para graph 8 of Article 101 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan.   
467.  With respect to Article 14 of the WTO Agreemen t on Implementation of Article VII of the 
GATT 1994, which stated that the Interpretative No tes in Annex I formed an integral part of the 
WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994, the representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that the provisions of most of the Interpretative Notes were already reflected in the CU Agreement on the Determinat ion of Customs Value of Goods Transferred Across 
Customs Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008 and implemented along with other 
provisions of the WTO Agreement on Implementati on of Article VII of the GATT 1994 in Code of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010, and the Treaty on the Customs Code  of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009.  
The remaining provisions of the Interpretative No tes would be implemented in a decision of the 
Eurasian Economic Commission, a successor of the CU Commission, or in national legislation upon Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.  
468.  Asked to provide further information on the process of implementation of the 
Interpretative Notes in EAEU and national legal acts, the representative of Kazakhstan responded 
that the Protocol on Amendments and Addenda to the Agreement on the Determination of 
Customs Value of Goods, Transferred Across Customs Border of the Customs Union of 
25 January 2008 was aimed at bringing the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation into compliance with the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  Certain provisions of the Interpretative Notes were illustrative and did not represent legal norm s, therefore, had not been included into the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  For instance, such provisions as illustrative examples of the 
Interpretative Note to Article 5 provided for deductive value method, illustrative examples of the Interpretative Note to Article 2 applied in the tr ansaction value method of identical goods, etc.  
Therefore, the Commission jointly with EAEU member States had adopted documents that 
incorporated the remaining provisions of the Inte rpretative Notes.  These documents were adopted 
by decisions of the Commission.  In particular, the Collegium of the Commission had approved: 
(i) "The Rules on Application of Methods on Dete rmination of Customs Value of Goods According to 
the Transaction Value of Identical Goods (Method 2) and According to the Transaction Value of 
Similar Goods (Method 3)" on 30 October 2012, which incorporated illustrative examples of the Interpretative Notes to Articles 2 and 3 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation; (ii) "The 
Rules on Application of Method on Determinatio n of Customs Value of Goods According to the 
Deductive Value Method (Method 4)" on 13 November 2012; (iii) "The Rules on Application of Method on Determination of Customs Value of Goods According to the Computed Value Method 
(Method 5)" on 12 December 2012; and (iv) "The Rules on Application of Method on Determination 
of Customs Value of Goods According to the Transaction Value Method (Method 1)" on 20 December 2012, which incorporated the remaining relevant provisions of the Interpretative 
Notes.  
469.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply its customs valuation laws, regulations and practices, including those to prevent under-valuation of goods, in conformity with th e WTO Agreement, including Article I of the WTO 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 an d the WTO Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of the GATT 1994.  Accordingly, Kazakhstan would not use any form of minimum value, such as reference prices, or fixed valuation schedule for customs valuation of goods.  In addition, 
Kazakhstan would ensure that in the event that its customs service could not determine the proper 
customs value or disputed the transaction value o ffered, it would release the goods subject to the 
posting of sufficient guarantee for the maximum am ount of the customs payments that could be 
owed as defined by the customs body of Kazakhst an.  She further confirmed that, in determining WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 106 - 
 
  the value of imports, Kazakhstan would apply the pr ovisions of paragraph 2 of Decision No. 4.1 of 
the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation "On Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software for Data Processing Equipment" and Decision No. 3.1 of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation "On the Treatment of Interest Charges in the Customs Value of Imported Goods".  
The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Rules of Origin 470.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that as  of 1 July 2010, Kazakhstan applied rules of 
origin to imports in accordance with Chapter 7 of the Treaty on the Customs Code of the 
Customs Union of 27 November 2009  (hereinafter: CU Customs Code).  Non-preferential rules of 
origin and their application were governed by the provisions of the Agreement on Common Rules for Determining the Country of Origin of Goods of 25 January 2008 (hereinafter: CU Agreement on 
Rules of Origin), including the Rules of Determination of the Country of Origin (hereinafter:  CU 
Rules of Origin).  These instruments closely foll owed the work of the World Customs Organization 
(WCO) and the WTO regarding the application and harmonization of non-preferential rules of 
origin.  The principles for determination of the country of origin of goods were based on 
international practices and implemented the recommendations of the revised Kyoto Convention, which had come into force in 2009.  Paragraph 3 of Article 58 of the CU Customs Code provided 
that the determination of the country of origin had to be carried out in accordance with 
international treaties of the EAEU member States that defined the procedure for determining the country of origin of goods.  She further stated  that the determination of the origin of goods 
originating from developing and least-developed countries and eligible for the system of 
preferences maintained by the EAEU member Stat es was governed by the Agreement on Rules of 
Origin of Goods, Originating from Developing and Least Developed Countries of 12 December 2008 (hereinafter: CU Agreement on Origin of Goods from Developing and Least Developed Countries), 
including the CU Rules of Origin of Goods, Originating from Developing and Least Developed 
Countries  (hereinafter: CU Rules of Origin fo r Developing and Least Developed Countries).  
The customs procedures for determination of the country of origin of goods provided in the 
CU Customs Code had replaced the customs procedures contained in Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
No. 401-II of 5 April 2003, and these procedures were no longer in force.  Additional provisions on rules of origin could be found in Chapter 10 of  Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On 
Customs Issues in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter: Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan) that had replaced Customs Code No. 401-II of 5 April 2003.  She stressed that the 
country of origin of goods was determined in al l cases when application of measures of customs 
tariff and non-tariff regulations depended on the country of origin of goods.  
471.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, pursuant to Article 58 of the CU Customs 
Code, goods were recognized as originating from a specific country if they were wholly made in that country or substantially transformed in accord ance with criteria set forth in the EAEU customs 
acts.  The basic criterion for substantial transformation for non-preferential goods was the shift in 
the tariff classification of the goods on the level of at least one of the first four digits, as established by paragraph 4 of the CU Rules of Or igin annexed to the CU Agreement on Rules of 
Origin.  Paragraph 2 of the CU Rules of Origin provided a complete list of the kinds of goods which 
could be produced wholly in a country.  Paragraph 5 of the CU Rules of Origin included an 
illustrative list of operations which did not satisfy the criteria for production of goods within a country.  Other criteria of sufficient transfor mation could be established exclusively by the 
Commission as set out in paragraph 6 of the CU Rules of Origin.  
472.  In response to a specific question from a Member, she confirmed that the tariff 
nomenclature referred to in Article 348 of the Cu stoms Code of Kazakhstan corresponded to the 
subheadings and headings of the tariff nomenclature mentioned in Article 2(a)(i) of the WTO 
Agreement on Rules of Origin, adding that Kaza khstan had adopted the 2012 Harmonized System 
Nomenclature.  As of 1 January 2010, classificati on of goods was based on the Common Tariff 
Nomenclature of the Foreign Economic Activity of the Customs Union, established by Decision of 
the CU Commission No. 130 of 27 November 20 09.  The Common Tariff Nomenclature of the 
Foreign Economic Activity of the Customs Union had been modified in accordance with the 2012 
Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System. 
473.  Members requested further information on the CU Agreements, CU Decisions, CU Customs 
Code and EAEU legal acts that governed the application of rules of origin to imports into Kazakhstan, as well as Kazakhstan's domestic legislation containing such regulations.  They sought WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 107 - 
 
  assurances that Kazakhstan's rules of origin co mplied with the provisions of the WTO Agreement 
on Rules of Origin, including information on how these measures established preferential and non-preferential rules of origin.  Members also sought elimination of Kazakhstan's requirement that imports where MFN origin could not be initially proven were subject to twice the MFN tariff 
rate, as this requirement was unduly burdensome given that after the accession of Kazakhstan to 
the WTO, goods originating in only a small number of countries could possibly originate from non-MFN trading partners.  These Members sought a commitment that Kazakhstan would assess 
the MFN rate on all goods originating from countries  enjoying MFN duty rate from the date of the 
accession to the WTO.  They also asked Kazakhst an to clarify whether, for goods whose origin 
could not be clearly established and which could be  cleared through customs only after payment of 
customs duties at double the MFN rate, it was possible to submit a certificate of origin or other 
proof subsequent to customs clearance and, if orig in was subsequently satisfactorily established, 
whether excess duties could then be refunded.  
474.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that, pursuant to Article 58 of the 
CU Customs Code, goods were recognized as originating from a specific country if they were 
wholly made in that country or substantially transformed in accordance with the criteria set forth in the CU  Rules of Origin and Commission Decisi ons.  Furthermore, Article 59 of the CU Customs 
Code established that the country of origin of g oods could be certified by either a declaration of 
origin or a certificate of origin.  Article 60 of the Code stipulated that the declaration of origin of goods constituted a statement on the country of or igin of goods made by the manufacturer, seller 
or sender in connection with exportation of the goods, provided that the statement specified 
information allowing to determine the country of origin of goods.  Commercial or any other 
documents related to the goods could also be used as such a declaration.  Pursuant to Article 61 of the CU Customs Code, the certificate of origin of goods constituted documentary proof of the 
country of origin of goods, if issued by the comp etent body or organization of a given country, or 
of the country of exportation of the said goods in cases where the country of exportation issued 
such certificates, based on the information obtained from the country of origin of such goods.  
The certificate of origin had to be submitted with the customs declaration and other documents 
presented for customs clearance.  
475.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 61 of the 
CU Customs Code, if the certificate of origin of goods was not properly completed, e.g., there were 
violations of the EAEU certificate form requir ements, the customs bodies independently took a 
decision concerning denial to consider the certificate as a basis for granting tariff preferences.  According to paragraph 5 of Article 61 of the CU Customs Code, the customs bodies could also 
request additional documentary proofs or clarifications when conducting customs control.  
Such requests, however, did not impede the release of goods based on the information of the country of origin declared when placing the goods under the customs procedure.   
476.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that a certificate of origin had to contain an 
indication of the country of origin; a written declaration that the goods conformed to the corresponding criteria of origin; and a written certification regarding the accuracy of the supplied information, issued by the competent body of the country of exportation.  Certificates of origin 
were not obligatory for non-preferential trade, except if the customs bodies found that the 
information on the country of origin of goods that influenced application of rates of customs duties, 
taxes and/or non-tariff regulation measures, was inaccurate; or if a certificate of origin was 
required by international agreements to which Kazakhstan was a party.  Failure to provide a 
correctly drafted certificate or information on the origin of the goods was not a sufficient reason for denial of customs clearance, except for cases stipulated in paragraph 2 of Article 62 of the 
CU Customs Code (e.g., if the goods originated in countries from which imports to the customs 
territory of the EAEU or transit through its territory were prohibited in accordance with the customs legislation of the EAEU or the legislatio n of the EAEU member States).  Goods imported 
without a correctly completed certificate of origin would be subject to MFN duty rates.   
477.  The representative of Kazakhstan also explaine d that in the event goods were delivered in 
a dismantled or unassembled state over several shipments, when it was impossible to deliver the whole lot at one time due to production or transp ortation problems or when the lot of goods had, 
by mistake, been divided into parts, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the CU Rules of Origin established a 
number of specific rules to assist in determining the country of origin of goods (e.g., the indicated goods could, at the discretion of the importer, be considered as one shipment).  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 108 - 
 
  478.  She added that in accordance with Article 62 of the CU Customs Code, when goods were 
brought into the EAEU customs territory, a document  confirming the country of origin of the goods 
had to be shown if Kazakhstan (or other EAEU member States) granted preferential tariffs to the country of origin of the goods pursuant to Kazakhstan's customs legislation and/or international 
agreements of the EAEU member States.  Curre ntly, a certificate of origin (either the "A" 
Document attached to the Annex 1 to the CU Rules of Origin for Developing and Least Developed Countries, or the ST-1 Document for CIS preferences, was required.  Goods were considered as 
originating from a developing or least developed country subject to preferential tariff treatment 
when they were fully produced in such country.  She added that Part III of the Rules of Origin for 
Developing and Least Developed Countries provided that the EAEU member States could establish a procedure for application of criteria of substantial transformation for countries eligible for tariff 
preferences based on the determination that the va lue of inputs used in the production process 
and originating from countries not covered by pref erential treatment or of unknown origin did not 
exceed 50% of the total declared value.  She also noted that Part VI of the CU Rules of Origin for 
Developing and Least Developed Countries provided the terms for application of the rules of direct 
purchase and direct shipping for granting such preferential tariffs.  Pursuant to Part VIII of the CU Rules of Origin for Developing and Least Developed Countries, in cases where there were 
reasonable doubts regarding the authenticity of the certificate or information contained in the 
certificate, the customs bodies could request th e competent bodies of the developing or least 
developed country that had issued the certificate of  origin to provide additional documentary proof. 
479.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that with respect to goods traded within the 
EAEU and/or goods covered by free trade agreements between Kazakhstan and other 
CIS countries, Kazakhstan applied the "Rules of Origin of Goods in the CIS" approved by the Council of Heads of CIS Governments on 20 November 2009 (hereinafter: Rules of Origin of the 
CIS), and the Agreement of the CIS countries on Rules of Origin of Goods Originating from 
Developing Countries for the Purpose of Tariff Preferences when Granting Tariff Preferences under the Generalized System of Preferences of 12 Ap ril 1996.  These rules had been developed in 
accordance with the international practice for determination of origin of goods.  Additional criteria 
of direct purchase were used, along with the requ irement that the exporter be established legally 
in a Party to the Agreement on Free Trade Area signed by the CIS countries on 18 October 2011 (hereinafter: CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011), as or iginally provided for in the Decision of the 
Heads of Governments of CIS Countries of 18 October 1996.  Currently, there were no other 
arrangements for the determination of the country of origin of goods within the framework of the EAEU, the Eurasian Economic Community or the CIS.  For any free trade arrangements with 
countries not members of the CIS, she noted that the rules of origin for these preferential 
arrangements were contained in the free trade agreements themselves. 
480.  Members sought clarification of the requirement that, in order for imported goods to be 
eligible for preferential tariff rates under CIS free trade agreements, the exporter had to be a 
legally established resident in a Party to a CIS free trade agreement, and asked if corporate registration would satisfy that requirement, or wh ether there were other criteria that had to be 
satisfied.  In response, the representative of Ka zakhstan stated that, as for the requirement that 
the exporter be legally established in a Party to the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 there were 
not any other criteria, apart from registration, to qualify.  In addition, to obtain a preferential tariff, goods had to be purchased directly from th e other CIS countries, i.e., pursuant to paragraph 
 5.1 of the Rules of Origin in the CIS, only CI S goods that did not leave the CIS territory, except 
for transit of goods under customs control through third countries, were eligible for preferential tariff rates under the CIS Free Trade Agreement.   
481.  Some Members also asked for further explanation about the possibility, under EAEU legal 
instruments, that "the country of origin could also be understood to mean a group of countries, region or part of a country, if this was necessary to identify them, with a view to determining the origin of goods".  They noted that the WTO Agr eement lacked such provisions, and they requested 
a clarification of how and under what circumstances the origin of a good could be ascribed to a 
region or part of a country.  These Members requ ested confirmation from Kazakhstan that these 
provisions would be applied in full conformity  with the WTO Agreement.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that pa ragraph 1 of Article 58 of the CU Customs Code 
stated that the country of origin of goods could be a group of countries, a customs union as well as a region or a part of a country, if it was difficult to determine the exact country of origin within the 
group of countries.  Under those circumstances, the relevant group of countries, customs union, or 
if necessary in order to identify origin, a region or part of a country could be considered as the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 109 - 
 
  country of origin.  The representative for Kazakhstan noted that a region or part of a country was 
considered as the country of origin in cases where it was necessary to define the origin of the goods as such, and to date had only been used in trade remedy cases.   
482.  A Member noted that the right to seek a determination of origin prior to importation was 
contained in Article 2(h) and paragraph 3(d) of Annex II of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin.  
Some Members stated that Kazakhstan should implement this and other aspects of the Agreement (e.g., right of appeal) prior to WTO accession.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that the EAEU member States could make preliminary decisions with regard to determination of 
the country of origin of goods in the order stipulated by its national legislation, as determined by Article 58 of the CU Customs Code.  According to  Article 91 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, 
the customs bodies could make preliminary decisions on the country of origin of goods.  
The customs bodies, on request of an applicant, made preliminary decisions with regard to 
determination of the country of origin of goods when the information on the goods was available.  Preliminary decisions with regard to determination of the country of origin of goods were made by 
the customs bodies with the application of prefer ential and non-preferential regimes and in the 
form approved by Government Resolution No. 912 "On Form of Approval for Classification of Goods, on Classification of Goods in Unassemb led State and Adoption of Preliminary Decisions 
Concerning the Determination of the Country of Origin of Goods for Preferential and Non-
Preferential Regimes" of 8 September 2010.  She al so noted that, as of 1 July 2010, Order of the 
Chairman of Customs Control Agency No. 210  "On Approval of the Rules for Preliminary Decisions 
and Their Form" of 15 May 2003 was no longer in force.  
483.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at from the date of accession, measures on 
rules of origin, whether adopted by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be 
applied in Kazakhstan in conformity with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin, 
and would reflect the interim rules in Annex II to that Agreement, including the provisions for 
transparency, right of appeal, and notifications to the WTO Committee on Rules of Origin.  She further confirmed that, consistent with the requ irements of Article 2(h) and of paragraph 3(d) 
of Annex II of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Orig in, both for non-preferential and preferential 
rules of origin, customs bodies would provide an  assessment of the origin of goods subject to 
import upon the request of an exporter, importer or any person with a justifiable cause and issue 
the assessment no later than 150 days after a request provided that all necessary elements had 
been submitted.  According to the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin, any 
request for such an assessment would be accept ed before trade in the goods concerned had 
begun, and any such assessment would be valid for three years provided that the facts and 
conditions, including the rules of origin, under which they had been made remained comparable.  
She further confirmed that the previous practice of using "double MFN" rates as the default tariff rates for imports of undeterminable origin had been eliminated.  The Working Party took note of 
these commitments. 
- Other Customs Formalities 484.  Some Members stated that the requirement to obtain an import "transaction passport", in 
addition to registration and licensing for currency control was duplicative and an unnecessary 
burden on trade.  These Members of the Working Party were concerned that the "transaction 
passport" constituted an unacceptable universal licensing system and currency control incompatible with Articles XI and XV of the GATT 1994.  These Members asked Kazakhstan to 
remove the "transaction passport" requirement prior to WTO accession.   
485.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  the Treaty on the Customs Code of the 
Customs Union of 27 November 2009 (hereinafter: CU Customs Code) or other EAEU legal acts did 
not regulate the "transaction passport" requirem ent.  This issue was left to the national 
competence of the EAEU member States.  She fu rther explained that, within the framework of 
reduction of administrative barriers to trade, the "transaction passport" had been cancelled in accordance with Law No. 530-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Currency Control and Regulation" of 6 January 2012, which 
had amended Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005.  The "transaction passport" had been replaced by  a procedure for registration of foreign trade 
contract exceeding the equivalent of US$50,000.  The exporter or importer had to register its 
foreign trade contract prior to any money payments under the contract and/or movement of goods across the border of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  To this end, the exporter or importer had to WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 110 - 
 
  submit to the bank an application form and an orig inal or a copy of the contract.  The bank had to 
register the contract and assign the registration number within one working day.  The registration 
procedure for foreign trade contracts was required only for the purposes of statistical data gathering and for monitoring foreign trade payments.   
486.  Some Members expressed concerns regarding the requirement to provide an electronic 
copy of the import and export declaration as part of the required customs documentation, as well as the granting of an exclusive licence for the provis ion of electronic copies of these declarations to 
"Accept" Corporation.  The cost to the importer of obtaining such an electronic copy, and the 
requirement that importers still had to present a paper copy of the import declaration also 
represented a concern.   
487.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, to facilitate control at the border, her 
Government was in the process of implementing the Unified Automated Information System 
(UAIS).  As a first step, the Government of Kazakhstan had introduced an electronic customs declaration system.  Paper customs declarations continued to be used in parallel.  At the moment, 
test application of the electronic customs declaration system was being conducted in several 
regions of Kazakhstan.  The system would be a pplied across the country when all necessary test 
applications were completed.  The date of introduction of the system across the country depended 
on the outcomes of implementation of the system in the pilot regions.  Concerning the protection 
of confidential information under the UAIS, she said that the State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of Finance used standard software to ensure the security of information in the system.  She pointed to Article 16 of Code of the Republic  of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 (herei nafter: Customs Code of Kazakhstan), pursuant 
to which customs bodies, customs officials as well as other persons who had access to information in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan had no right to disclose, use for 
personal purposes, or transfer to third partie s (including Government bodies), information 
regarded as State, commercial, bank or tax secret , or other secrets protected by laws as well as 
other confidential information (exceptions were contained in paragraph 3 of this Article).   
488.  Asked about the results of the review of the temporary customs warehouse storage 
regime, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the temporary storage regime was regulated 
by Chapter 30 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan (Articles 259-270).  According to Article 260, temporary storage of goods was not limited or restricted to the use of temporary warehouses but 
could also involve the importer's own warehouses, customs and free warehouses; as well as 
premises, open-air and other locations belonging to the authorized economic operator.  In addition, pursuant to Article 265 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, upon written request and 
provision of guarantee for the payment of custom s duties and taxes, imported goods could be 
temporarily stored in an unauthorized warehouse belonging to the recipient of goods, in automobile vehicles located on the territory owned or leased by the recipient of goods, or railway 
vehicles located on the territory owned or leas ed by the owner of the goods.  According to 
paragraph 2 of Article 259 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, temporary storage of goods was 
not required for goods transported by pipeline and by electricity transmission line.   
489.  Asked about any regulations mandating specific customs entry points for specific goods, 
the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, according to Article 248 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, customs clearance took place at the point of placement of goods under a customs procedure.  These provisions were the same within the framework of the EAEU.  According to 
Article 156 of the CU Customs Code, customs oper ations regarding the placement of goods under 
customs procedure took place at the customs points during their office hours.  Article 248 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan authorized the Government of Kazakhstan to designate customs 
entry checkpoints for certain categories of goods.   Pursuant to the Regulations to items 2.9 and 
2.10 of the "Common List of Goods that are Subject to Bans and Restrictions for Importation and Exportation by Parties of the Customs Union of the Eurasian Economic Community in Trade with Third Countries" approved by Collegium Decision No . 134 of 26 August 2012, State control had to 
be established over the exportation of natural diamonds, in accordance with the requirements of 
the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme.  In addition, the importation of the following categories of goods had to take place at designated customs checkpoints: natural diamonds 
(HS tariff line 7102 21 000 0); raw precious stones (HS Codes 7106, 7108 and 7110); ores and 
concentrates of precious metals (HS Code 2616); and scrap and wastes from precious metals (HS Code 7112). WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 111 - 
 
  - Preshipment Inspection 
490.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that preshipment inspection currently did not 
exist in Kazakhstan.  Preshipment inspection had been applied in accordance with Government Resolution No. 1301 "On the Implementation of Inde pendent System for Preshipment Inspection of 
Goods Imported into the Republic of Kazakhstan " of 4 October 1995 for three years from 1996 to 
1999.  Pursuant to Government Resolution No. 1301, preshipment inspection had been carried out by "Société Générale de Surveillance S.A.".  The preshipment inspection procedure had applied to 
all imported goods, except for:  (i) goods imported from CIS countries; (ii) goods of customs value 
lower than US$3,000; (iii) goods of strategic importance; (iv) dual-purpose goods; and (v) printing materials.  Government Resolution No. 1301 had been repealed by Government Resolution No. 1778 of 24 November 1999.   
491.  She also noted that in 2001-2005, an indepe ndent expert examination of the customs 
value of imported goods had been conducted by the private company "ICS Inspection and Control Services Kazakhstan".  This procedure had not represented a preshipment inspection as the 
decision had been taken within 30 days of the sampling of imported goods.  The independent 
expert examination had applied to all imported goods, except for goods included in the List of Goods not Subject to Independent Examination, such as goods of strategic importance and 
medicines.  This system was also no longer in place. 
492.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that there were currently no plans to 
re-establish preshipment inspection requirements for imports, but that Kazakhstan reserved the 
right to have recourse to such measures in th e future, should it be deemed necessary by the 
Government.  The authority to establish preshipment inspection existed in EAEU legal instruments.  
Part VII of Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third Countries" to the EAEU Treaty replaced the corresponding provisions of the CU Agreement on Common Measures for Non-
tariff Regulation in Respect to Third Counties of 25 January 2008.   From 1 January 2015, these 
EAEU provisions authorized the imposition of non-tariff regulatory measures on the basis of national interests, inter alia , to implement national laws not in conflict with international 
agreements.  Part II of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty replaced corresponding provisions of the 
CU Agreement on the Introduction and Implementa tion of Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in 
Goods, on the Common Customs Territory in Re spect of Third Countries of 9 June 2009.   
These EAEU provisions authorized the Commission to introduce non-economic measures affecting 
goods in foreign trade from third countries on the basis of proposals from the EAEU 
member States.  Pursuant to Part X of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, Kazakhstan could propose to introduce preshipment inspection.  Even if the Commission rejected the proposal, such 
measures could be imposed unilaterally for up to six months, as provided for in Part X of Annex 
No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty. 
493.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, if a 
preshipment inspection scheme were to be introduc ed in the future, whether by Kazakhstan or by 
the competent bodies of the EAEU, its operation would be in conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, including th e WTO Agreement on Preshipment Inspection, and 
the WTO Agreement on the Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994, inter alia , in respect 
of the due process and transparency requirements of the WTO Agreements, in particular Article X 
of the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and WTO Agreement on the Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994 an d confidentiality of data received would be 
ensured.  In addition, it would be ensured by Ka zakhstan or by the competent bodies of the EAEU 
that charges and fees for preshipment inspection would comply with Article VIII of the GATT 1994, 
that preshipment entities would establish and maintain appeals procedures as foreseen by Article 
2.21 of the WTO Agreement on Preshipment Inspecti on, and that that scheme would not constitute 
an undue and additional burden on exporters to or  importers of goods into Kazakhstan.  Further, 
she confirmed that the duration of any such sch eme would be limited to three years and that 
importers and exporters would not be precluded from challenging facts found and findings made 
by preshipment inspection entities as part of  administrative appeals against decisions of 
Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU where such decisions were based on those facts 
or findings.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 112 - 
 
  - Anti-dumping, Countervailing Duty and Safeguard Regimes 
494.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the application of anti-dumping, 
countervailing and safeguard measures was regulated by the following legal acts:  (i) Articles 48 – 50 of Section IX "Foreign Trade Policy" and Annex No. 8 "Protocol on Application of Safeguard, 
Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures with Re spect to Third Countries" of the EAEU Treaty; 
and, (ii) Decision of the Collegium of the Commission No. 1 "On Certain Issues of Application of Safeguard, Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on the Common Customs Territory of the 
Customs Union" of 7 March 2012 (hereinafter: EEC Collegium Decision No.1); as well as the 
following national legislation:  Law No. 421-I "On Anti-Dumping Measures" of 13 July 1999 (hereinafter: Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures"); Law No. 441-I "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures" of 16 July 1999 (hereinafter: Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures"), as 
amended by Law No. 114-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Subsidies, Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Measures" of 9 January 2006; Law No. 337-I "On Measures to Protect the Domestic Market upon Importation of 
Goods" of 28 December 1998 (hereinafter: Law "On Safeguard Measures"), as amended by 
Law No. 53-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Law 'On Safeguard Measures to Protect the Domestic Market upon Importation of Goods'" of 16 June 2005; and Resolution of the Government 
of Kazakhstan No. 1374 "On Approval of the Rules for Conducting Investigations prior to 
Introduction of Safeguard, Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Measures" of 9 September 2000 (hereinafter: Government Resolution No. 1374).  She stated that Kazakhstan was in the process of amending Law "On Safeguard Measures", Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" and Law "On 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures" with the purpose to bring them into conformity with the 
EAEU Treaty and the relevant WTO Agreements.  Th e provisions of the EAEU Treaty replaced the 
Agreement on Application of Safeguard, Anti-Dum ping and Countervailing Measures to the Third 
Countries between the Republic of Belarus, the Re public of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation 
of 25 January 2008  (hereinafter: Agreement on Application of Safeguard, Anti-Dumping and 
Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries) and the Protocol "On the Order on Submission to 
Authority Conducting the Investigation of the Information including Confidential Information for 
the Purposes of Safeguard, Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Investigations" of 19 November 2010 which were terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015. 
495.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that during the time when the Customs Union was 
in force (2010-2014), the transitional arrangements that were set out in the additional Agreement 
on Application of Safeguard, Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures to Third Countries in the Transitional Period of 19 November 2010 (hereina fter: Transitional Period Agreement) had been 
applicable during unification of safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing measures of the 
Customs Union.  Upon expiration of the transitional period, the provisions of the national laws and regulations applied to the extent they did no t contradict the Agreement on Application of 
Safeguard, Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries.  The investigations 
ongoing on the date of the entry into force of the Agreement on Application of Safeguard, Anti-
Dumping and Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries had continued in accordance with the new rules and the national regulations to the extent those regulations did not contradict that 
Agreement.  Therefore, if the national industry met the criteria of the domestic industry of the 
Customs Union as stipulated by the Agreement on  Application of Safeguard, Anti-Dumping and 
Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries, the investigation had continued, otherwise it had 
been terminated.  The representative of Kazakh stan provided additional information on trade 
remedy measures currently applied in Kazakhstan and the EAEU in Annex 16 of this Report. 
496.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that starting from 17 April 2012 the 
Department for Domestic Market Protection of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter: 
Department or investigating body) was authorized  to carry out new safeguard, anti-dumping and 
countervailing investigations on the common customs territory of the Customs Union by EEC Collegium Decision No. 1.  This authority was continued under the EAEU Treaty.    
- (a) Transitional regime 
497.  The Transitional Period Agreement stipulat ed that all safeguard, anti-dumping and 
countervailing measures that had been in force prior to 19 November 2010 had to be reviewed by 
the national authorized body in accordance with the criteria used to define the domestic industry of 
the Customs Union.  If the domestic producers, which had filed applications for the national measures, met the criteria of the domestic industry of the Customs Union, promulgated in the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 113 - 
 
  Agreement on Application of Safeguard, Anti-Dum ping and Countervailing Measures to the Third 
Countries, the measures could be extended to the customs territory of the Customs Union by a Decision of the CU Commission for the period which had been determined initially.  In case the domestic industry definitional criteria were not met, the measure would continue to be applied at 
the national level.  The representative of Kazakhst an added that in case national investigations on 
application of safeguard, anti-dumping and counter vailing measures had been finished by the time 
of signing of the Transitional Period Agreement,  but the measure had not been taken, safeguard, 
anti-dumping and countervailing measures would be applied at the national level by a decision of 
the national authorized body and had to be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the Transitional Period Agreement.  If safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing investigations had 
not been finished by the time of signing of the Transitional Period Agreement and investigations 
had still been conducted, safeguard, anti-dumpi ng and countervailing measures would be applied 
in accordance with the Agreement on Applicatio n of Safeguard, Anti-Dumping and Countervailing 
Measures to the Third Countries.  During the transi tional period provided for in the Transitional 
Period Agreement, the national authorized body  of the Republic of Kazakhstan had continued 
ongoing investigations and had conducted new trade remedy investigations in the Republic of Kazakhstan upon request of the domestic industry of the CU.  However, all decisions to impose, 
extend, review or terminate trade remedy measur es had to be taken by the Commission on the 
basis of a proposal from the Government of the member State that carried out the investigation. 
498.  In response to the question of a Member on the status of the "transitional period", the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that the term "transitional period" referred to the period that 
had been necessary for the review of existing national measures in force in the territory of 
member States.  The transitional period, which had ended on 1 August 2012, also had allowed national governments of the member States to delegate the authority to conduct investigations 
and introduce trade remedy measures from national bodies to the supranational body – the 
Eurasian Economic Commission.  
499.  According to CU Commission Decision No. 44 "On Certain Issues of Protection of the 
Internal Market" of 16 May 2012, all the ongoin g investigations had been transferred to the 
Department by 31 July 2012.  Accordingly, from 1 August 2012, the Department would be the single authorized body to conduct safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing investigations on the common customs territory of the CU.  This authority was continued under the EAEU Treaty. 
- (b) Regime established under the EAEU Treaty 
500.  T h e  r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  s t a t e d  t h a t  t h e  p r o v i s i o n s  o f  S e c t i o n  I X  o f  t h e  
EAEU Treaty provided the principles for applicatio n of trade remedies by the EAEU member States 
– the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation  and the Republic of Belarus – with regard to 
third countries.  The provisions of the EAEU Treaty , in her view, complied with the principles of the 
WTO Agreement. 
501.  According to Article 48 of Section IX of the EAEU Treaty, all decisions with respect to 
common trade remedies in the EAEU member States had to be taken by the Commission.  The decisions of the Commission would be collect ively applied by all the EAEU member States 
within the customs territory of the EAEU against the imports of relevant third countries.   
502.  According to Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty , (i) anti-dumping investigations could be 
initiated, provided there was evidence of dumped imports and material injury, threat of such injury or material retardation of the establishment (material injury) of the sector of economy of the 
member States as a result of such imports; (ii) investigations regarding safeguard measure 
application could be initiated, provided that there was evidence of imports of products into the EAEU customs territory in such increased quantities , absolute or relative to production, and under 
such conditions as to cause or threaten to cause serious injury to the sector of economy of the 
member States that produced like or directly competitive products; and, (iii) countervailing investigations could be initiated, provided there was evidence of a specific subsidy and subsidized imports into the EAEU customs territory that caused material injury to the sector of economy of 
the member States. 
503.  According to Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, the sector of economy of the member States 
was defined as:  (i) all producers of a like product - for the purposes of anti-dumping and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 114 - 
 
  countervailing investigations; (ii) all producers of a like product or a directly competitive product - 
for the purposes of safeguard investigations; or, (iii) producers of a like product – for the purposes of anti-dumping and countervailing investigations, and producers of a like or a directly competitive product – for the purposes of safeguard investigations, whose share in the total production volume 
in the EAEU member States constituted at least 25% of total production.  Similarly, the relevant 
import was measured as the import inflow into the entire EAEU customs territory. 
504.  A Member asked a question regarding the initiation of investigations under the national 
legislation.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that all investigations on the customs 
territory of the EAEU were initiated and conducted in accordance with the EAEU legal framework.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that pursuant to Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, application for initiation of investigations with respect to anti-dumping and countervailing 
measures was considered to have been made "by or on behalf of the sector of economy of the 
member States" if it was supported by those producers whose collective output in the EAEU member States constituted more than 50% of the to tal production of the like product produced by 
that portion of the sector of economy of the me mber States expressing either support for or 
opposition to the application; and investigation could only be initiated provided that producers in the EAEU member States expressly supporting the application accounted for no less than 25% of 
the total production of the like product produced by the sector of economy of the member States.  
Application for initiation of investigations with respect to safeguard measures was considered to have been made "by or on behalf of the sector of economy of the member States" if producers in the EAEU member States supporting the application accounted for no less than 25% of the total 
production of the like or directly competitive pr oduct produced by the sector of economy of the 
member States.  
505.  A Member questioned Kazakhstan regarding a deadline to accept or reject a request for 
safeguard investigation made by the domestic industry mentioned in Government Resolution No. 
1374.  In particular, this Member asked if the authorized body had 45 days from the date of 
submission to decide on acceptance or rejection and to publish a notice of initiation of investigation 
in the official mass media, and also if it was requ ired, within these 45 days, to notify the applicant 
within 10 days from submission of the application in case some information was missing and if a decision not to initiate an investigation was made.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that according to the provisions established by Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, the investigating body 
had 30 calendar days from the date of a safeguard,  anti-dumping or countervailing application, to 
verify the accuracy and completeness of the information stated in the application.  Such period could be extended but could not exceed 60 calendar da ys in total.  An application was refused if an 
applicant failed to submit all the necessary docu ments.  The 30-day period did not include the 
notification procedure in the mass-media and official publications about initiation of investigation.  In cases when initiation of an investigation was refused, the investigating body informed the 
applicant of the refusal and its reason within 10 working days from the date of taking such 
decision.  If the decision on initiation of the investigation was taken, the investigating body notified the authorized body of the exporting foreign co untry and other interested parties and published 
the notification on the official website of the Co mmission within 10 working days from the date of 
taking such decision.   
506.  A Member asked if the period of 30 calendar da ys to notify stakeholders started from the 
date when the authorized body took the decision  to initiate an investigation and without any 
relation to 45 days for publishing the notice of  initiation in the media.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, in accordance with the provisions established by Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, stakeholders would be notified within 10 working days from the 
date when a decision to initiate the investigation was taken.  The investigating body had to notify 
the EAEU member States and announce via the official website of the Commission the initiation of the investigation in order to involve all interested parties.  This period did not relate to the 30-day period during which the investigating body reviewed the application and took a decision about 
initiating an investigation or rejecting an application.  The investigating body notified interested 
parties and published the notification on the official website of the Commission about initiating an investigation within 10 working days from the date when a decision to initiate the investigation 
was taken. 
507.  Further, a Member pointed out that neither Kazakhstan's Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" 
nor its Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures" appeared to address how the investigating 
authority would treat an interested party who refused access to, or otherwise did not provide, WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 115 - 
 
  necessary information within a reasonable period or significantly impeded an investigation, as 
provided under Article 6.8 of the WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 
1994 (hereinafter: WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement or the ADA).  This Member also asked 
Kazakhstan to explain how Annex II of the ADA was reflected in Kazakhstan's legislation.  
508.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, according to 
Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" and Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures", if an interested party did not provide necessary information within the time periods established by the 
authorized body, or otherwise significantly impeded an investigation, the authorized body could 
conduct an investigation on the basis of the facts available.  Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty also stipulated that in cases when an interested party refused access to, or failed to submit necessary information to the investigating body within the time periods established by the investigating body, 
or otherwise significantly impeded an investigation, such party was considered as uncooperative 
and the investigating body would make preliminar y and final determinations on the basis of the 
facts available.  As regards the provisions of Annex II of the ADA, they were reflected in 
paragraphs 239-243 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, which provided for data collection within 
the course of investigation.  Paragraph 239 of Anne x No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty provided that after 
a decision on the initiation of the investigation was made, the investigating body would issue 
questionnaires to certain interested parties.  Within the course of the investigation, the 
investigating body would verify the accuracy and reliability of the information provided by the interested parties.  
509.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that during the 
investigation, the investigating body had the ri ght to request additional information from the 
interested parties.  A request was considered to be received after seven calendar days from the 
date of posting or handing it over to a representative of an interested party.  She added that 
pursuant to Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty responses had to be submitted to the investigating 
body within 30 calendar days from the date of rece ipt.  In case the responses were submitted after 
the deadline, the investigating body had the right not to consider such information. 
510.  In response to the request by a Member to  clarify the legal authority that provided 
protection of confidential information in trade remedy investigations, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that confidential information provided by the interested parties to the investigating body was protected by internal re gulations of the Commission and paragraphs 254-
258 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty.  In particular, paragraph 258 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU 
Treaty stipulated that confidential information could not be disclosed without permission of the interested parties which submitted the information.  Interested parties providing confidential 
information also had to provide a non-confidential summary of the information.  She further added 
that in accordance with paragraph 258 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, officials and employees of the investigating body accountable for the disclosure of the confidential information provided to 
the investigating body could be deprived from the privileges and immuni ties provided by the 
international treaty within the EAEU and prosecuted in accordance to the procedure established by the Commission.  
511.  Another Member asked Kazakhstan to describe the very limited situations provided for by 
the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan where confidential information could be disclosed.  
The representative of Kazakhstan responded that such cases were set out in Code of Criminal 
Procedure of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 231-V of 4 July 2014.  Persons requested by a 
relevant competent body carrying out a criminal investigation to provide confidential information 
could not refuse to provide information because it needed to be kept secret.  However, the results of the preliminary criminal investigation, including commercial secrets, were 
confidential.  The evidence containing commercial secrets, upon request of the persons concerned, 
could be reviewed at a closed proceeding.  After the proceeding, the legal documents of the case containing commercial and other secrets were confid entially retained with the case records.   
512.  A Member asked if provisions on retroactivity, duration, review of anti-dumping duties, 
consultation and dispute settlement were foreseen in Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures".  In reply, 
the representative of Kazakhstan said that paragraphs 104 and 105 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty provided for use of anti-dumping measures retroactively in the cases envisaged by Articles 
10.2 and 10.6 of the ADA.  According to paragr aph 104 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, a 
definitive anti-dumping duty might be levied on products not more than 90 days prior to the date of application of provisional measures, if according to the results of the investigation in respect of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 116 - 
 
  that product it was found that: (i) there was a history of dumped imports which caused injury or 
that the importer had been, or should have been, aware that the exporter delivered the product at 
a price below its normal value, and that such import would cause injury, and (ii) the injury was caused by substantially increased dumped imports in a relatively short period of time which in light 
of the duration and the volume as well as ot her circumstances (including rapid growth of 
inventories of the imported products) could significantly undermine the remedial effect of the anti-dumping duty to be applied, under the conditio n that the importers of the product concerned 
should be given an opportunity to comment.  As  for the duration and review of anti-dumping 
duties, paragraph 107 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty provided that the effective period of 
anti-dumping duty would not exceed the period necessary to counteract the dumping which was causing injury.  This period would not exceed five ye ars from the date of its introduction or the last 
sunset review.  The period of an application of  anti-dumping measures could be extended if a 
sunset review of the measures showed that the expiry of the measure was likely to lead to a 
recurrence of dumping and injury. Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty stipulated that the sunset 
review procedures of anti-dumping measures were carried out by the investigating body on its own 
initiative or on the basis of the interested parties' application submitted not later than six months prior to anti-dumping duty termination.  
513.  In reply to a question on procedural fairness, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
Article 29 of Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" and paragraph 215 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty established that all interested parties had the right to defend their interests during an 
anti-dumping investigation.  For this purpose and upon request of an interested party, the 
investigating body had to provide an opportunity for the parties with opposing interests to discuss 
the investigation documentation and provide for additional information within the time-frame that did not disrupt the course of investigation.  The investigating body had to duly provide all 
interested parties with the possibility of acquaint ing themselves with public information used by 
the investigating body in anti-dumping investigation in order to allow them prepare arguments for their cases. 
514.  As for dispute resolution, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that provisions 
regulating appeals to decisions and actions of the Commission were stipulated in the Statute of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union.  In partic ular, paragraph 39 of the Statute provided for the 
right of economic operators in the EAEU member States and all other interested parties, including 
foreign economic operators, to bring a case against the decisions of the Commission to the EAEU 
Court.  In accordance with the Statute, appeals to the Court by the domestic and foreign economic 
operators and peculiarities of the legal proceedings were determined by the Statute of the Court of 
the Eurasian Economic Union. 
515.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to indicate whether and how Article 13 of the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (hereinafter: SCM Agreement) 
concerning consultations before initiation was reflected in Section 4 on countervailing measures of 
the Agreement on Application of Safeguard, Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that from 1 January 2015, paragraph 225 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty provided for consultation 
procedures.  In particular, before initiating an investigation, the investigating body had to send 
invitations for consultations to the foreign countries concerned in order to clarify the situation and seek to reach a mutually agreeable solution.  In the course of investigation, the foreign countries 
were allowed to continue the consultations with the investigating body.  Conducting consultations 
did not prevent the initiation of an investigation and application of provisional or final countervailing measures. 
516.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that pursuant to paragraph 90 of Annex No. 8 to 
the EAEU Treaty, investigation proceedings could be suspended or terminated by the investigating body without the imposition of anti-dumping duti es upon receipt, in writing, of satisfactory 
voluntary undertakings from any exporter of the product under investigation to revise its prices or 
to cease exports to the customs territory of the EAEU  at prices lower than its normal value, if such 
exporter's undertakings were supported by its af filiated persons in the EAEU member States and 
the investigating body came to a conclusion that accepting such undertakings eliminated the 
injurious effects of dumped imports and decide d to approve these undertakings.  Thus, the 
exporters could choose between two options:  (i) pay anti-dumping duties and continue supplying the goods to the customs territory of the EAEU; or, (ii) agree to a price undertaking for the 
purposes of eliminating the injurious effects of dumping.  A price undertaking was not mandatory.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 117 - 
 
  The investigating body could not require a price undertaking which increased prices higher than 
the dumping margin.  Price increase could be less than the dumping margin if the investigating body established that the price increase resulting from the undertaking was enough to remove the injury to the sector of economy of the member  States.  Investigation proceedings regarding 
subsidized goods could be suspended or terminated  by the investigating body without imposition 
of countervailing duties upon receipt in writing of satisfactory voluntary undertakings from (i) an exporting foreign country to terminate or reduce the subsidies being provided or take measures to 
eliminate the injury caused to the sector of econom y of the member States; or (ii) an exporter of 
the goods concerned increased the price for these goods in such a way that it would eliminate the injury caused to the sector of economy of the member States.  
517.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that in anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases 
the amount of the duty had to be sufficient to eliminate injury to the domestic industry; an 
anti-dumping duty could not exceed the calcul ated dumping margin, and a countervailing duty 
could not exceed the amount of the subsidy of the exporting foreign country calculated for a 
product unit.  If a safeguard measure was applied by establishing an import quota, the import 
quota could not be lower than the annual average level (in relation to quantity or value) of the import volume of the product under investigation for three years preceding the date of submitting 
an application for investigation, for which the statistical data was available, except for cases when 
clear justification was given that a lower import quota to prevent or remedy serious injury or a threat of such injury to the domestic industry was necessary.  
518.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan's anti-dumping law did not appear to address whether an 
individual anti-dumping rate could or would be calculated for a company who was not chosen as a 
mandatory respondent because the authority limited the examination of interested parties to a "reasonable number" of respondents, such as that  contemplated in Article 6.10.2 of the ADA.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" did not cover this 
specific situation.  However, this situation was provided for in Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty.  Pursuant to paragraph 50 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, if a company was not chosen as a 
mandatory respondent, the amount of the margin of dumping calculated in respect of every 
foreign exporter or foreign producer that was not selected but submitted the necessary information within a period established for such submission during the investigation, could not exceed the weighted average dumping margin established in respect of the selected foreign exporters or 
foreign producers of the allegedly dumped imports.  As noted above, should there be any 
discrepancies between the national law and the EA EU Treaty, the EAEU Treaty would prevail.   
519.  A Member noted that paragraph 11 of Article 10 and paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the 
Agreement on Application of Safeguard, Anti-Dum ping and Countervailing Measures to the Third 
Countries stated that the "all others" rate or duty would be based on the highest margin of dumping determined during the investigation and asked the representative of the Kazakhstan to 
explain why an adverse inference was made (i.e., the highest margin of dumping) in setting the 
"all others" rate, as opposed to choosing a mo re neutral method (e.g ., the weighted average 
margin of all participating respondents).  Furthe rmore, this Member asked the representative of 
Kazakhstan to explain how this methodology was consistent with Article 9.4 of the Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994.  
520.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, if the investigating body found that an 
interested party had failed to cooperate for the purpose of the investigation, the investigating body 
could use an inference that was adverse to the intere sts of that interested party.  The investigating 
body could also determine the dumping margin on the basis of any other information at its disposal, including the weighted average margin of all participants. These provisions could be 
found in paragraphs 51 and 212 of Annex No. 8 to the Treaty. 
521.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, if an interested party cooperated, but 
was not selected for the calculation of an individual dumping margin, the anti-dumping duty applied would be applied in accordance with Arti cle 9.4 of the WTO Agreement on Implementation 
of Article VI of the GATT 1994.  The Workin g Party took note of this commitment. 
522.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that an anti-dumping investigation would 
be terminated in cases when the investigating body determined that the dumping margin was 
considered to be less or equal to de minimis (i.e., 2%), or that the volume of dumped imports was 
negligible.  The volume of dumped imports would be normally regarded as negligible if the volume WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 118 - 
 
  of dumped imports from a particular country was found to account for less than 3% of imports of 
the like product to the EAEU customs territory, unless countries which individually accounted for less than 3% of the imports of the like produc t to the EAEU customs territory collectively 
accounted for more than 7% of imports of the like product to the EAEU customs territory.  
This provision was, in her view, in line with Article 5.8 of the ADA. 
523.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" had 
been amended in line with the provisions of the ADA.  The term "normal price" had been replaced 
by "normal value" and the concept of ordinary cour se of trade had been modified in line with the 
ADA.  The de minimis dumping margin had been reduced from 5% to 2%, in accordance with the 
ADA.  To ensure transparency and confidentiality,  the authorized body would be required to make 
written evidence, presented by one interested party,  promptly available to other interested parties 
participating in the investigation, with the exception of confidential information.  
524.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures" had been amended to introduce new definitions of the terms "domestic producers", "like 
products" and "specific subsidy".  In her view, the provisions of the Law had been brought in 
conformity with the provisions of Article 8 of the WTO SCM Agreement with regard to non-actionable subsidies.  The new amendments had introduced provisions for holding consultations 
aimed at reaching a mutually acceptable solution, pr ior to conducting an investigation, as provided 
under Article 13 of the WTO SCM Agreement.  Thro ughout the investigation, foreign states would 
be given a reasonable opportunity to continue such consultations.  In reply to a specific question, 
she said that the concept of "benefit" was contained in paragraph 16 of Article 1 of Law "On 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures".  The definition of a subsidy in this Law conformed to the 
definition provided in Article 1 of the WTO SCM Agreement.  
525.  Several important changes had been introduced to Law "On Safeguard Measures".  
Namely, the definitions of key terms used in the law – such as domestic industry, serious injury 
and threat of serious injury – had been modified  in accordance with the definitions of the WTO 
Agreement on Safeguards.  The procedure for the imposition of provisional safeguard measures 
and, in particular, refund procedures had also been adjusted.  Opportunities would be provided to 
all interested parties to present evidence and express their views.  A provision that envisaged progressive liberalization of safeguard measures after their first year of application had been added.  The representative of the Republic of Ka zakhstan noted that provisions of the national 
laws and regulations on trade remedy measures applied in Kazakhstan to the extent that they did 
not contradict the EAEU Treaty. 
526.  A Member expressed concern about the application of safeguard measures to certain 
products by the Republic of Kazakhstan and considered that maintaining such measures 
contradicted the existing Law of the Republic of  Kazakhstan No. 337-I "On Measures to Protect the 
Domestic Market upon Importation of Goods" of 28 December 1998, Article 13a of the Free Trade 
Agreement of 15 April 1994 as amended on 2 Apr il 1999 and provisions of the WTO Agreement on 
Safeguards.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 1055 "On Introduction of Safeguard Measures to Import of Certain Kinds of Confectionary Products" of 14 September 2011 would be revoked by the date of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.   
527.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, compliance 
with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Im plementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994, 
the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, and the WTO Agreement on 
Safeguards, whether by the competent authorities of Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be ensured.  She further confirmed that Kazakhstan would notify and implement, 
upon accession, all appropriate laws and regulations applicable in Kazakhstan in conformity with 
the provisions of these Agreements.  She conf irmed that, from the date of accession, WTO 
requirements would be met in applying anti-dum ping, countervailing and safeguard measures in 
Kazakhstan, whether by the competent authority of Kazakhstan or by the competent body of the 
EAEU.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that any trade remedy measure 
applied on the date of WTO accession of Kazakhstan and any trade remedy measure procedure launched before the date of accession as well as  any trade remedy measure resulting therefrom, 
whether by the competent authority of Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be 
consistent with the relevant WTO Agreement, as of  the date of accession.  She also confirmed that 
all interested parties, as defined in the relevant WTO Agreement, would have access to any non-WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 119 - 
 
  confidential information that was relevant to any trade remedy measure applied on the date of 
WTO accession of Kazakhstan, or adopted subsequently, on the basis of an investigation or review launched before its accession.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that, from the date of WTO accession of Kazakhstan, any interested party could request the initiation of a review 
of any trade remedy measure, applied on the date  of accession or adopted subsequently, on the 
basis of an investigation or review launched before the WTO accession of Kazakhstan, identifying the elements of that measure, which were, in their view, not consistent with the above-mentioned 
WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
B. EXPORT REGULATIONS - Customs Tariffs, Fees and Charges for Services Rendered, Application of Internal 
Taxes to Exports 
528.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that export duties were levied pursuant to 
Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 520 "On Customs Duty Rates" of 7 June 2010.  According to this Resolution, export duties were applied to the following list of 
goods:  livestock raw skin and wool, ferrous and non-ferrous metal scrap and waste, and oil 
products.  The export duties for these goods varied from 10% (uncombed wool) to 30% (copper waste and scrap).  Export duties were subject to publication after approval by the Government and 
had to enter into force within 30 calendar days after the first official publication.  Export duties 
currently applied in Kazakhstan are listed in Annex 17(A) of this Report. 
529.  She added that within the framework of the CU, the member States elaborated the 
Agreement on Export Duties with regard to Third Countries of 25 January 2008 (hereinafter: CU 
Agreement on Export Duties) and agreed that it  would form the legal basis for levying export 
duties on goods exported from the member States to third countries after it entered into force and 
necessary implementing arrangements were concluded, which was not yet the case.  The CU 
Agreement on Export Duties was a framework agreement which established general terms on 
which export duties within the CU had to be applied.  However, it did not provide unified 
regulations and unified rates of export duties.  Thus, from the date of the CU establishment 
on 1 January 2010, export duties remained subject to regulation at the national level.  Article 1 of 
the CU Agreement on Export Duties called for the eventual development of a Common List of 
Goods Subject to Export Duties (CU Common List), to be established by the member States within 60 days of its entry into force.  Accordingly, each member State was in the process of developing a 
list of goods subject to export duties with the rates of the duties established according to the 
national legislation.  Once developed, the list would be submitted to the EEC.  The EEC on the 
basis of information provided by the member States would create the Common List.  She also 
added that pursuant to Article 3 of the Agreem ent, if a product made on the territory of a 
member State levying export duties on this product was exported to a third country from the territory of another Party that was not levying export duties on this product or was applying lower 
rates, such Party had to ensure that export duti es were:  (i) levied at the rates applied by the 
producing Party; and (ii) included into the Common List of Goods Subject to Export Duties.   
530.  As regards the common policy to be further developed in this field, some Members 
observed that the WTO commitments undertaken by each of the EAEU member States define the 
ceilings for setting common export duties of the EAEU. The representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that, under the EAEU regime described in paragraphs 251 and 252 in Chapter III "Framework for Making and Enforcing Policies" of this Report and in paragraphs 185 and 186 of 
Chapter III "Framework for Making and Enforcing Policies" of the Working Party Report on the 
Accession of the Russian Federation to the WT O, the WTO commitments undertaken by an EAEU 
member are part of the EAEU legal framework.  The representative of the Russian Federation 
supported this statement of the representative of Kazakhstan.  
531.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan applied export duties on an MFN 
basis.  However, exports under the free trade re gime between members of the Eurasian Economic 
Community (EurAsEC) and under the bilateral free trade agreements in force with all other 
CIS countries were exempt from the payment of ex port duties, except for Moldova.  At the same 
time, in accordance with the Agreement on Free Trade Area signed by the CIS countries (Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Mold ova, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and 
Ukraine) on 18 October 2011, Kazakhstan had reserved the right to apply export duties for exports 
of certain goods to other parties of the Agreement, except for the EAEU member States.  Upon its WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 120 - 
 
  entry into force, the new Agreement would replace the bilateral FTAs of the CIS countries with 
Kazakhstan (for more details please see Chapter VIII "Trade Agreements" of this Report).  She further noted that the Agreement between Ka zakhstan and the European Union on Trade in 
Certain Steel Products approved by Government Resolution No. 738 of 19 July 2005, had abolished 
customs duties, charges or any similar measures on  exports of ferrous scrap and waste to the EU 
falling under heading 7204 of the EU Combined Nomenclature (paragraph 3, Article 2).   
532.  Some Members noted that export duties appeared to be introduced to displace foreign 
products, which would otherwise be imported, with domestic products or otherwise distort trade.  
These Members considered that this application of export duties was unacceptable and inconsistent with Articles II and XXIII of the GATT 1994.  Some Members disagreed with these views.  These Members also stated that, in their view, th e discriminatory export duty exemptions granted 
to EAEU member States were inconsistent with Article I of the GATT 1994.  In addition, a Member 
expressed particular concerns regarding the ex port duty imposed on iron and steel scrap, 
considering the pressure that it placed on countries not applying such restrictions in the current 
market.  This Member also noted the non-MFN treatment of ferrous scrap in Kazakhstan's exports 
to the European Union, and stated that this practice had to be eliminated prior to WTO accession.  Finally, this Member enquired as to whether, as was the case with one other EAEU member State, 
only exports to the EAEU were exempt from the pa yment of export duties.  Given that Kazakhstan 
had free trade area relations with other CIS countries, discrimination in the elimination of duties and charges among preferential trading partners would have implications for the consistency of such a measure with Article XXIV of the GATT 1994.   
533.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  export duties were applied on a limited 
number of goods mainly for fiscal and regulatory purposes as well as environmental reasons and, as such, did not violate the provisions of the GATT 1994.  She added that her Government was 
undertaking steps to narrow down the list of goods subject to export duties.  To this end, the 
export duty on aluminium and beryllium ligature (Ex. HS Code 7601 20 100 0) had been eliminated.   
534.  Kazakhstan was also planning to reduce the export duty on ferrous scrap (HS Code 7204).  
The representative of Kazakhstan noted that these reductions in export duties on ferrous waste and scrap contained in HS heading 7204 and others  had come about through bilateral negotiations 
and the results of these negotiations had been duly reflected.  A Member indicated that it had 
accepted Kazakhstan's invitation to engage in bila teral negotiations to reduce its export duties on 
the above-mentioned products in the context of Ka zakhstan's accession to the WTO.  The results 
of these negotiations are provided in Annex 17(B) of this Report.  In the view of this Member, 
these results formed part of the balance of commitments and concessions in the terms of 
accession of Kazakhstan.  This Member emphasized that, if Kazakhstan subsequently increased these export duties above the commitment level,  it would disturb the balance of concessions 
established in the bilateral and multilateral negotiations for WTO accession, and this Member 
would have the right to take appropriate action to rebalance the concessions.  Some other Members stated that this was without prejudice to their views in respect of the status and legality 
of export duties in the framework of the WTO Agreement. 
535.  With respect to application of export duties to CIS countries, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that export duty exemptions applied to CIS countries were applied in accordance with Article XXIV of the GATT 1994.  In  particular, the volume of Kazakhstan's exports 
to CIS countries subject to export duties was less than 1% of the total volume of goods exported 
to CIS countries.  She held the view that Kazakhstan's participation in FTAs was in compliance with Article XXIV:8(b) since the duties were eliminated on substantially all the trade between the FTA's 
participants.  With regard to exports of ferrous scrap to the European Union, she noted that the 
bilateral Agreement between the Republic of Ka zakhstan and the European Union on Trade in 
Certain Steel Products had expired, without replacement, on 31 December 2006; and the preferential treatment granted thereunder had ceased at that time. 
536.  Asked to explain how Kazakhstan would schedule its export levies so as to avoid distortion 
of domestic or international trade, the representative of Kazakhstan said that export duties for goods continued to play an important fiscal role in  Kazakhstan.  She noted that export duties did 
not affect the price at which an exported commodity (i.e., oil, oil products and non-ferrous metals) 
was purchased abroad.  Therefore, they were not used by Kazakhstan in a way that distorted domestic or international trade. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 121 - 
 
  537.  Some Members asked Kazakhstan to describe the new tax regime for oil operations.  
In addition, a Member asked Kazakhstan specifically to provide further information on how the world price of crude oil was determined for the pu rposes of revising the export duty on this 
product. 
538.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan had introduced a new tax 
regime for oil operations designed to increase o il revenue from the export of crude oil.  The new 
tax regime for oil operations applied for all contractual obligations, except for Production Sharing 
Agreements (PSAs) concluded between the Government and subsurface users prior to 
1 January 2009 and which had passed the obligatory tax assessment.  Subsurface users operating under PSAs were bound by the tax conditions stipulated in the PSAs in accordance with the provisions of the tax legislation which applied on the date the contract had been signed.  
The conditions of the PSAs were fixed and could not be changed with subsequent changes in 
legislation without the prior agreement of both parties (see also Chapter II "Economic Policies", Section "Monetary and Fiscal Policy" of this Report). 
539.  Natural persons and juridical persons (subsurface users), operating under the new tax 
regime were subject to taxes affecting ordinary tax payers, as well as specific taxes, including a rent tax on the export of crude oil and gas conden sate, excess profits tax, minerals extraction tax, 
corporate income tax and bonuses.  The rent tax had been established by Article 303 of Code of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 (hereinafter: Tax Code).  It was calculated based on the value of exported crude oil and gas condensate, which was set on the basis of the actual volume 
exported and its market (world) price.  The market (world) price of crude oil was determined by 
multiplying the average of daily price quotations by the average exchange rates of KZT (tenge) to 
a related foreign currency.  Most particularly, price quotations of crude oil in foreign currency of 
each standard type of crude oil of Brent DTD or Urals MED for the tax period published by "Platts 
Crude Oil Marketwire" or "Argus Crude" were used for calculation of the rent tax.  Rent tax rates 
ranged from 0% when the world price was US$20 per barrel to 32% when the world price 
exceeded US$200 per barrel.  The rent tax applied to all juridical and natural persons engaged in 
the export of crude oil and gas condensate.  The export rent tax was aimed at recovering excess profits from subsurface users.  
540.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would implement, from the 
date of accession, its tariff concessions and commitments contained in Part V of the Schedule of 
Concessions and Commitments on Goods of Kazakhstan.   Accordingly, products described in Part V 
of that Schedule would, subject to the terms, conditions or qualifications set-forth in that Part of 
the Schedule, be exempt from export duties in excess of those set-forth and provided therein.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further conf irmed that Kazakhstan would not apply other 
measures having an equivalent effect to export duties on those products.  She confirmed that, 
from the date of accession, Kazakhstan would apply export duties in conformity with the 
WTO Agreement, in particular with Article I of th e GATT 1994.  Accordingly, with respect to export 
duties and charges of any kind imposed on, or in connection with exportation, any advantage, favour, privilege or immunity granted by Kazakhstan to any product destined for any other country 
shall be accorded immediately and unconditionally to the like product destined for the territories of 
all other WTO Members.  The representative of Kaza khstan confirmed that, in the event of a future 
EAEU common policy on export duties referred to in paragraph 530, Kazakhstan will fully 
implement its WTO commitments on export duties as set out in Part V of the Schedule of 
Concessions and Commitments on Goods of Kazakhst an and subject to the terms, conditions or 
qualifications set-forth in that Part of the Schedule.  In particular, section (b) of Part V of the 
Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Good s of Kazakhstan provided for the alignment of 
Kazakhstan's rates with lower rates of the Russian Federation for a number of products in case the 
competent bodies of the EAEU decide to unify expo rt duties on these tariff lines.  Until such 
unification, Kazakhstan would only be bound by the commitments indicated in section (a) of Part V 
of the Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on  Goods of Kazakhstan.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that any changes of its export duties and measures having an equivalent effect would be notified to the WTO providing all relevant information on the day of their 
publication and in any case at least 30 days before any such changes enter into force.  
The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Ka zakhstan would, from the date of accession to 
the WTO, administer export tariff rate quotas (TRQs) in a manner that is consistent with the 
WTO Agreement and in particular the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 122 - 
 
  WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures .  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.  
- Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas  541.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that as of 1 January 2015, the legal basis for the 
application of export restrictions on goods exported to third countries from the EAEU could be 
found in Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third Countries" to the EAEU Treaty, which replaced the following Agreements:  (i) on Common Measures of Non-tariff 
Regulation in Respect of Third Countries of 25 Ja nuary 2008; (ii) on the Procedure of Introduction 
and Implementation of Measures Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries of 9 June 2009; and (iii) on the Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise Trade of 9 June 2009.  According to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, 
decisions to apply non-tariff measures on exports from the EAEU member States to third countries 
were taken by the Commission.  By Decision of the Collegium of the Commission No. 134 "On 
Normative Legislative Acts in the Area of Non-Tariff Regulation" of 16 August 2012, which had 
replaced Decision of the CU Commission No. 132 "On Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the 
Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Re public of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" 
of 27 November 2009, the Commission had approved  the "Common List of Goods that are Subject 
to Bans and Restrictions on Importation and Exportation by Parties of the Customs Union of the 
Eurasian Economic Community in Trade with Third Countries" (hereinafter: Common List).  The Common List originally had entered into forc e on 1 January 2010.  Among the goods subject 
to export prohibition were:  (i) printed information or information on audio-visual and other 
devices containing information, which might cause damage to the political or economic interests of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, to its State security, to the health and morality of its citizens; (ii) timber, recovered paper, paperboard and wastepaper; and (iii) service or civil weapons, their 
main parts and cartridges.  The representative of  Kazakhstan further explained that, according to 
Parts III and VII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, and in accordance with the national legislation, non-tariff measures could be introduced on exports from the EAEU if those measures 
were:  (i) necessary to prevent or reduce a critical shortage of foodstuffs or other goods 
considered essential for the domestic market; (ii)  necessary to maintain public morals or law and order; (iii) necessary to protect the life or health of citizens, environment, animal and plant life or health; (iv) related to the export of gold or silver; (v) applied to protect cultural valuables and 
heritage; (vi) required to prevent the exha ustion of exhaustible natural resources and 
implemented simultaneously with reduction/restriction of the domestic production or consumption associated with the conservation of exhaustible natural resources; (vii) linked to an export 
limitation of domestic raw materials to provide sufficient quantity of such materials for the 
domestic processing industry in periods when domestic prices for such materials were lower than the world prices as a result of a stabilization plan implemented by the Government; (viii)  essential 
to acquire or distribute goods in case of their general or local shortage; (ix) essential to comply 
with international obligations; (x) essential to ensure the defence and security of the State; (xi) necessary to ensure observance of regulatory lega l acts consistent with international commitments 
and related to the application of the customs law, preservation of the environment, protection of 
intellectual property, and other legal acts; and, (x ii) necessary to the application of standards or 
regulations for the classification, grading or marketing of commodities in  international trade. 
542.  Furthermore, pursuant to Part VIII of Anne x No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, the Commission 
was authorized to apply quantitative export restri ctions and prohibitions to protect the external 
financial situation and safeguard the balance of payments.  For this reason, the Commission was authorized to apply quantitative export restrictions or grant exclusive licenses to import or export 
based on proposals from EAEU member States.   
543.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at as of 1 January 2015, pursuant to Part II 
of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, the authority to impose non-tariff measures on exports from an EAEU member State to third countries had been  transferred to the Commission.  A proposal to 
apply a non-tariff measure could be filed by an  EAEU member State or by the Commission.  
The Commission had to take its decision within 30 days from the date the proposal had been 
submitted.  The decision, if positive, would co me into force 45 days after the date of its 
publication.  Such non-tariff measures would be applied to goods destined for third countries, and 
applied equally to exports to all countries.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 123 - 
 
  544.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
under Part X of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, an EAEU member State could unilaterally impose a temporary non-tariff measure, if such a measure was due to the reasons stipulated in paragraphs 541 and 542.  Furthermore, an EAEU me mber State could, pursuant to Part X of Annex 
No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, request the Commission to impose non-tariff measures on exports.  
If the Commission rejected the proposal, the EAEU member State could, under Parts VII and VIII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, impose such measures unilaterally, in conformity with Part X of 
Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty.  Under these provisions, unilateral measures could be imposed 
for only six months.  The EAEU member States not imposing the non-tariff measure were to take the necessary steps to prevent the export ation of the subject good(s) from the 
EAEU member State applying the non-tariff measures to third countries.  EAEU member States not 
applying the measure were to require licenses and/or permits for exportation of the subject goods 
from their respective territories.   
545.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that Kazakhstan currently imposed 
prohibitions on the export of lumber, saw timber, certain wood products, reusable paper, 
cardboard, raw paper materials and paper waste that were included in the Common List.  Asked to confirm whether the prohibition on the export of lumber and saw timber was only applied by 
Kazakhstan or by all EAEU member States, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that this 
export prohibition was only applied by Kazakhstan.  The measure was applied in conjunction with the ban on cutting forest trees in "specially protected natural territories" (SPNTs).  The SPNTs included geographical territories of special interest which had environmental, scientific, cultural 
and recreational value placed under special protection regime (Law No. 175-III "On Specially 
Protected Natural Territories" of 7 July 2006).  The prohibitions were related to conservation of exhaustible natural resources and had been introduced to maintain the ecological balance and 
prevent deforestation, given Kazakhstan's highly lim ited reserves of wood.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan considered that this export prohibition was applied in compliance with paragraphs (b) and (g) of Article XX of the GATT 1994, on a non-discriminatory basis, and in a manner which did 
not constitute a means of disguised restriction on international trade.  Goods subject to export 
restrictions are listed in Annex 6 of this Report. 
546.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that Kazakhstan currently did not apply any 
quantitative or other restrictions on the export of grain or any other agricultural products.   
547.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan had implemented export restrictions on sunflower seeds 
and wheat until September 2008.  This Member enquired as to whether export restrictions on sunflower seeds and wheat were still in place.  In this respect, this Member asked the 
representative of Kazakhstan to explain the justification behind these actions.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, due to the critical shortage of food made from wheat on the domestic market, her Government had applied export restrictions on certain types of wheat 
in 2008.  In particular, the Government had adopted Resolutions "On Export Restrictions of Wheat" 
No. 343 of 15 April 2008 and No. 777 of 28 August 2008.  These Resolutions had remained in effect until 1 September 2008.  Government Resolution No. 930 "On Introduction of Amendments and Addenda to Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 681 of 10 July 2003" of 
8 October 2008 had applied export restrictions on sunflower seeds, which had been intended to be 
in effect until 1 April 2009.  However, in February 2009 export prohibitions on sunflower seeds had been repealed.  The Government of the Republic  of Kazakhstan had adopted Resolution No. 1042 
"On Introduction of Ban on Exportation of Certain Goods" of 5 October 2010 for export ban on 
oilseeds, vegetable oils and buckwheat in orde r to avoid supply shortages and mitigate price 
volatility in the domestic market.  The Resolution had remained in effect until 18 April 2011.  
At the moment, export restrictions on agricultural products were not applied in Kazakhstan.  
Furthermore, she added that Kazakhstan did not require any kind of sanctions/permits/licences applicable to grain exports.  
548.  In response to the question by a Member concerning temporary bans on exports of 
petroleum products from the territory of Kazakhstan, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 713 "On Introduction of Temporary Ban on Export of Light Distillates and Products, Kerosene, Gasoline and other Oil Products" of 27 June 
2014 had established the temporary ban on exports of light distillates and products (HS heading 
2710 12), middle distillates, kerosene gas oil, diesel oil (HS tariff lines 2710 19 110 0 –2710 19 480 0, 2710 20 110 0 – 2710 20 190 0) and motor oil (HS tariff line 2710 19 820 0), fluid for 
hydraulic purposes (HS tariff line 2710 19 840 0), light oil (HS tariff line 2710 19860 0), oil for WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 124 - 
 
  gears (HS tariff line 2710 19 880 0), electrical lubricating oil (HS tariff line 2710 19 940 0) and 
other petroleum products (HS tariff line 2710 20 900 0), except for house heating fuel.  She further added that the temporary bans were intr oduced in order to prevent a critical shortage 
of goods essential for the domestic market, since domestic oil refineries did not have sufficient 
technological capacity to fully meet the domestic needs in petroleum products.  At the moment, 
Kazakhstan imported more than 50% of petroleum products consumed within the country.  With the objective to eliminate a critical shortage  of petroleum products on its market by 2018, in 
accordance with the Government Resolution No. 567 "On Approval of Complex Plan on 
Development of Oil and Gas Sector for 2014-2018", Kazakhstan started technological modernization of oil refineries.  In her view, th e temporary measures applied by Kazakhstan were 
in full conformity with paragraph 2(a) of Article XI of the GATT 1994. 
549.  A Member noted that export bans and quantitative restrictions on commercial products 
were prohibited under the GATT 1994, unless justif ied under WTO provisions.  This Member sought 
a commitment from Kazakhstan that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan's export restrictions 
would be in conformity with WTO provisions, including Article XI of the GATT 1994.   
550.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied th at, upon accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan 
would apply such quantitative export restrictions only in accordance with Article XI of the 
GATT 1994 and Article 12 of the WTO Agreement on  Agriculture, and would amend its existing 
legislation to bring its legislation on export restrictions into compliance with the provisions of Article XI of the GATT 1994.  She further mentioned that paragraph 15 of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty incorporated provisions of Article 12 of th e WTO Agreement on Agriculture.  In addition, her 
Government had adopted Resolution No. 1404 of 27 December 2004, which had eliminated the 
export ban on aluminium and nickel waste and scrap. 
551.  In response to concerns raised by some Members who noted that, although minimum 
export prices had previously been eliminated, it a ppeared that the authorities were still operating a 
system with a similar effect, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Government Resolution No. 994 of 19 July 1997 had eliminated contract re gistration at the commodity exchange, and that 
Kazakhstan had no provisions stipulating minimum ex port prices on grain and, in general, did not 
apply minimum export prices. 
- Export Licensing Procedures 552.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, as with import licensing, as of 
1 January 2015, the legal basis for the export licensing system in Kazakhstan was established in 
Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, which replaced the following Agreements: (i) on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of Third Countries of 25 January 2008; (ii) on the 
Procedure of Introduction and Implementation of Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods on 
the Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries of 9 June 2009; and, (iii) on the 
Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchand ise Trade of 9 June 2009.  By Decision of the 
Collegium of the Commission No. 134 "On Normative Legislative Acts in the Area of Non-Tariff 
Regulation" of 16 August 2012, which had replaced  Decision of the CU Commission No. 132 "On 
Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009, the Commission had approved the 
"Common List of Goods Subject to Bans and Restrictions on Importation and Exportation by Parties 
of the Customs Union of the Eurasian Economic Community in Trade with Third Countries" (hereinafter: Common List), which had originally entered into force on 1 January 2010 (Annex 6 of 
this Report).  Kazakhstan confirmed that Annex 6 of this Report was exhaustive and that currently 
there were no other exports subject to licensing requirements. 
553.  Among the goods subject to export licensing were:  (i) hazardous waste; (ii) collectible 
materials in mineralogy and paleontology; (iii) wild-growing crude drugs (plants, parts of plants, 
seeds and fruits); (iv) wild live animals and certain wild growing plants; (v) rare and endangered species of wild animals and wild growing plants an d plants thereof and/or derivatives inscribed in 
the "Red Books" of EAEU member States; (vi) precious metals and gems; (vii) unprocessed 
precious metals, waste and scrap of precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals and 
commodities containing precious metals; (viii) mineral raw materials (only untreated stones); (ix) drugs substances with psychotropic effects and their precursors; (x) toxic substances, except 
for precursors of the drugs and substances with  psychotropic effect; (xi) special devices for 
unauthorized obtaining of information; (xii) encryption devices; (xiii) cultural valuables, documents WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 125 - 
 
  of the national archive funds, originals of the archive documents; (xiv) human organs and tissues, 
blood and its components; and, (xv) service and ci vil weapons, their main parts and cartridges.  
Currently, no goods were subject to automatic export licensing in Kazakhstan.  All goods listed for export licensing in Annex 6 of this Report were subject to non-automatic licensing.   
554.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at, according to Part IX of Annex No. 7 to 
the EAEU Treaty, the Ministry of Investments and Development (Ministry responsible for administration of licenses in Kazakhstan) issued three types of licenses: one-time, general, and 
exclusive.  One-time licenses were issued on the basis of a foreign trade contract related to goods 
subject to export licensing.  General licenses had to be issued upon decision of the Commission.  
Both types of licenses granted the right to export certain types of goods subject to licensing, in the 
quantity determined by the licence, and were valid for one year or, for goods with respect to which 
provisional quantitative restrictions had been introduced, until 1 January of the following calendar 
year.  Exclusive licenses gave the applicant the exclusive right to export certain types of goods.  The goods subject to exclusive licensing and the ho lders of exclusive licenses were to be decided 
by the Commission.  At the moment, Kazakhstan had not issued any exclusive licenses. 
555.  One-time licenses were issued by the Minist ry of Investments and Development, with the 
exception of licenses for the exportation of milita ry products and goods that could be used to 
create weapons of mass destruction, means of transportation of such weapons, and other 
armament and defence technology.  Licenses were i ssued upon receipt of: (i) an application for the 
licence; (ii) an electronic version of the application; (iii) a copy of the contract; (iv) a copy of a certificate confirming that the applicant was regist ered by a regional tax authority as a taxpayer; 
(v) a copy of the activity licence, if applicable; and, (vi) other documents, if so decided by the 
Commission, pursuant to which a licensing of this product had been introduced.  
556.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in addition to Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty and Commission Decisions, the national legislation of Kazakhstan, including Law 
No. 214-III "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007, continued to regulate the application of the licensing regime in Kazakhstan.   
557.  A Member also requested more information regarding the procedures for issuance of 
export licenses and the applied fees related to th ese procedures.  In response, the representative 
of Kazakhstan stated that procedure used for expo rt licensing was identical to the procedure used 
for import licensing (for further details, see Chapter IV "Policies Affecting Trade in Goods", Section 
(A) "Import Regulations", Sub-section "Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions, 
Quotas and Licensing Systems" of this Report).  With regard to export licensing fees, Kazakhstan 
applied uniform import/export licensing fees in relation to all goods.  According to Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax 
Code)" of 10 December 2008 (hereinafter: Tax Code), the import/export licensing fee was equal to 10 Monthly Calculation Index (MCI).  In 2014, the import/export licensing fee was equal to 
KZT 18,520 (approximately US$100) and the fee for re -issuance of licence was equal to KZT 1,852 
(approximately US$10). 
558.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that the export of certain flora and fauna species 
under threat of extinction, listed in Appendices  I, II and III of the Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) was subject to export permits issued 
in Kazakhstan.   
559.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, from the date of accession, quantitative 
restrictions on exports or restrictions on the sale for export of goods, such as quotas, bans, 
permits, prior authorization requirements, licensing requirements (including the requirements listed in Annex 6 of this Report), domestic market supply requirements or measures having 
equivalent effect that could not be justified under the provisions of the WTO Agreement, would be 
eliminated and not introduced, re-introduced or applied, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU.  She further confirmed that discretionary authority to temporarily ban exports 
or otherwise restrict exports, whether exercised by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the 
EAEU, would be applied from the date of accession  in conformity with the provisions of the WTO 
Agreement.  She also confirmed that, if Kazakhstan took recourse to Article XX(i) of the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, with respect to any measures, whether applied by 
Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EA EU, restricting exports of domestic materials 
necessary to ensure essential quantities of such materials to a domestic or EAEU processing WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 126 - 
 
  industry, such measures would not operate to incr ease the exports of or the protection of such 
industry.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECT ING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS 
- Industrial Policy, including Subsidies 
560.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Article 93 "Industrial Subsidies" and Annex 
No. 28 "Protocol on Common Rules for Granting Industrial Subsidies" of the EAEU Treaty  from 1 January 2015, established basic rules for granting industrial subsidies within the framework of 
the EAEU.  These provisions replaced the Agreem ent on Common Rules for Granting Industrial 
Subsidies between the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation 
of 9 December 2010 which had entered into force as of 1 January 2012 within the framework of the Single Economic Space, which was terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 
1 January 2015.  Article 93 and Annex No. 28 to the EAEU Treaty were aimed at ensuring a level 
playing field for companies operating within the EAEU in the absence of trade barriers.  Article 93 and Annex No. 28 to the EAEU Treaty incorporated  the main principles of the WTO Agreement on 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, and stipulated procedures for notification of specific 
subsidies, monitoring, disputesettlement, and conducting investigations by national authorities.  From 1 January 2017, EAEU member States could request the Eurasian Economic Commission 
(hereinafter: EEC or Commission) for approval of their specific subsidies.  The approved subsidies 
could not be challenged by other member States.  She further added that provision of subsidies in Kazakhstan was regulated by budget, tax, customs and investment legislation.  State support to the industrial sector of Kazakhstan's economy was mainly provided from the republican (central) 
budget.  In response to the questions of some Members of the Working Party about the objective, 
criteria and guidelines that governed the availability of regional subsidies and their use by regional bodies, the representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that, in accordance with Budget Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No.  95-IV of 4 December 2008, regional subventions were official 
transfers from higher-level to lower-level budgets, received within the limits of approved amounts 
in the republican or regional budgets, for the pu rpose of carrying out public services, such as 
development and maintenance of local infrastructure, running schools, and making social income 
support payments unrelated to the production of goods. 
561.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that State support to the industrial sector was 
aimed mainly at attracting investment into priority sectors of the economy, development of 
innovative industries, support of small and medi um enterprises and development of regions.  
The main instruments of State support included:  (i) investment preferences in the form of tax and customs duty exemptions on imports; (ii) in-kind State grants; (iii) preferences on land tax and 
property tax for juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects; (iv) subsidization of 
interest rates on commercial loans and providing partial guarantees of loans; (v) leasing on preferential terms; (vi) development of industrial  infrastructure; (vii) industrial preferences for 
juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects in socially and economically 
disadvantaged regions; (viii) service support of bu sinesses; (ix) tax deferrals; and (x) innovation 
grants.   
562.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more details on corporate income tax preferences 
provided to industries investing in the petrochemical sector and on special tax treatment for 
companies primarily engaged in information technology research and development, which operated in special economic zones (SEZs).  This Member also requested more information on the 
benefits provided for investment and industrial acti vities in Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 
99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 (hereinafter: Tax Code).  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that application of a 
preferential tax regime for industries engaged in the petrochemical sector was aimed at 
diversification of the national economy through development of processing industries.  She acknowledged that previously a preferential corporate income tax regime had been provided 
to companies in the petrochemical sector, in cases where 90% of the company's income had been 
generated from refining oil and gas resources produced in Kazakhstan.  However, this provision 
had been eliminated by Law No.89-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts on Issues of Taxation" of 22 November 2005.  She further stated that tax and customs duty 
exemptions granted to companies registered in SEZs were discussed in Chapter IV "Policies 
Affecting Trade in Goods", Section (C) "Internal Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Goods", Sub-section "Free Zones, Special Economic Areas" of this Report. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 127 - 
 
  563.  With respect to "soft loans", i.e., loans with subsidized interest rates, from Kazakhstan's 
ExImBank, some Members of the Working Party expr essed specific concerns that, to the extent 
that these loans were contingent upon export or import substitution, they could constitute a prohibited subsidy under Article 3.1 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures (hereinafter: SCM Agreement).  Kazakhstan was asked to confirm that the financing 
provided by the ExImBank conformed to the rules set out in items (j) and (k) of Annex I of the 
WTO SCM Agreement.  In response, the representati ve of Kazakhstan explained that, pursuant to 
Decree of the President of Kazakhstan No. 1815 "On Establishment of the State Export - Import 
Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July  1994, the main functions of the ExImBank had 
consisted of borrowing on international capital markets under State guarantee and providing loans 
on the domestic market.  Uniform terms and cond itions had been applied by the ExImBank in 
financing enterprises engaged in priority sectors of the economy.  For example, companies had 
received loans from the ExImBank for the following purposes:  (i) importation of agricultural equipment and machinery for the production of sugar beet; (ii) importation of equipment for 
construction projects and production of construction materials; (iii) importation of fertilizers; 
(iv) construction of electric power plants and pump producing plants; and (v) food processing.  
The ExImBank had financed three- to five-year investment projects, at a 6% interest rate, and 
with a grace period of two to three years.  She stated that the provision of loans had not been 
contingent upon export performance or import substitution requirements.  Since 2004, the ExImBank had been privatized and no longer oper ated on behalf of the Government, nor received 
any Government guarantees for loans extended to the ExImBank.  It now provided general 
banking services in the market as any other commercial bank of Kazakhstan. 
564.  Referring to a statement made by the representative of Kazakhstan regarding "soft loans" 
granted to support extraction and exportatio n of non-ferrous products and gold by the 
Development Bank of Kazakhstan, some Members of the Working Party requested further 
information on the nature of the financing (e.g., benefits to exports) provided by this Bank.  Kazakhstan was asked to confirm that the financing provided by the Development Bank conformed 
to the rules setout in item (k) of Annex I of the WTO SCM Agreement.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that the terms for financing export operations by the Development Bank were regulated by Law No. 178-II "On the Development Bank of Kazakhstan" of 25 April 2001 (hereinafter: Law "On the Development Bank").  She stated that for the provision of financial 
services, the Development Bank used funds borrowed on domestic and international capital 
markets on commercial terms.  Moreover, pursuant to Article 12 of Law "On the Development Bank", the interest rates charged for loans were  based on the average cost of borrowing and 
operating costs of the Bank.  Thus, on legal gro unds, the Bank was prevented from subsidizing the 
interest rates charged on its loans.  She stated that the Bank's financing of companies, including 
its loans for export operations, could not, in her view, be considered as export subsidies within the 
scope of Article 3.1 and Annex I of the WTO SCM Agreement.   
565.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan applied a system of decreasing (discount) coefficients on 
tariffs for railway transportation, which appeared to provide tariff reductions to producers of sulphuric acid and iron ore products, and was only available for export transportation.  
This Member stated that, to the extent that these incentives were contingent upon export (even if 
this was not necessarily the specific goal of the legislation), they could constitute prohibited export subsidies under Article 3.1 of the WTO SCM Agreemen t.  This Member asked Kazakhstan to explain 
how it planned to bring this programme into compliance with WTO provisions.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan replied that the use of decreasing coefficients on tariffs for railway transportation of sulphuric acid, which was a by-product of the re fining process and not demanded domestically, 
and iron ore had not been implemented to support exports of domestic goods.  A temporary 
decreasing coefficient had been applied for transportation of sulphuric acid on export routes, to address a potential negative environmental impact in Kazakhstan.  However, since 2003 no decreasing coefficients had been applied for transportation of sulphuric acid.  A decreasing 
coefficient on the transportation of iron ore had been applied due to the high volume of iron ore 
transported by railway.  The representative of  Kazakhstan further explained that a temporary 
0.25 decreasing coefficient had been applied from 22 February to 31 December 2004 for 
transportation of iron ore on export routes.  Si nce then decreasing (discount) coefficients had not 
been applied on the transportation of iron ore in Kazakhstan. 
566.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that in  2004, by Order of the Acting Chairman of 
the Agency On Regulation of Natural Monopolies and Protection of Competition No. 375-OD of 
8 September 2004, "Rules Governing Application and Discontinuation of Temporary Decreasing WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 128 - 
 
  Coefficients on Tariffs for Main line Railway Transportation" had been adopted.  These new rules 
affected only the services provided using the mainline railway network, which qualified as a natural monopoly.  Temporary decreasing coefficients only applied under any of the following conditions:  (i) the volume of transportation of the good by  railway exceeded, or was equal to the actual 
volume of transportation of this good during a si milar period in the preceding year; (ii) idle/under-
utilised segments of the mainline railway network would be used; (iii) the good was a by-product of industrial production and presented an environmental hazard; (iv) to provide equal tariff 
conditions for access to regulated services of the mainline railway network and railway 
transportation facilities under concession agr eements; and (v) transportation of passengers was 
socially important.  Once established, decreasing coefficients for railway transportation of a particular type of goods applied on a temporary basis to all entities (consignors) transporting these 
goods and were valid for all destinations, including domestic, export and import routes.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the criteria used for the application of decreasing 
coefficients on tariffs charged for the mainline railway transportation services were not contingent, 
in law or in fact, upon exportation or the use of domestic over imported goods.  In her view, as 
such, these measures could not be viewed as prov iding a prohibited subsidy within the meaning of 
Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement and Article XVI of the GATT 1994.  She added that other 
aspects of railway tariffs were addressed in Section "Pricing Policies" of this Report.  
567.  Some Members of the Working Party noted that Kazakhstan provided tax exemptions for 
exporters of yellow phosphorus, ground phosphat e rock and phosphate fertilizer, and expressed 
concern that these tax exemptions were contingent upon export and thus prohibited under 
Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement.  In response , the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
"Kazphosphat" Ltd. was engaged in a priority sector of the economy and had received investment preferences in the form of 50% reduction of corporate income tax until 31 August 2008, and 50% 
reduction of property and land taxes until 2007, in accordance with investment contracts 
concluded in 1999-2000.  No such preferences had been provided since 2008.  She confirmed that 
the criteria used for granting these tax preferences were not contingent, in law or in fact, upon 
export performance or the use of domestic over imported goods, rather on the strategic 
importance of the industry for diversification of the national economy.  
568.  In response to concerns raised by some Memb ers of the Working Party, who noted that tax 
exemptions had been granted under Law No. 75-I "On State Support to Direct Investments" of 
28 February 1997, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Law No. 75-I and Law No. 266-XIII 
"On Foreign Investments" of 27 December 1994 had been abolished and replaced by Law No. 373-II "On Investments" of 8 January 2003.  She ackn owledged that tax preferences granted prior to 
the adoption of the new Law "On Investments" rema ined in effect until the expiration of the terms 
of the contracts signed between the authorized bo dy and investors (i.e., by early 2009 for the last 
remaining contracts).  The new Law did not contain requirements concerning the minimum volume 
of investments to be made in order to be eligible for investment preferences.  She added that the 
detailed information on the investment preferences granted under Law "On Investment" was contained in Section "Investment Regime" of this Report.   
569.  Some Members of the Working Party requested Kazakhstan to provide comprehensive 
information on subsidies that would have to be notified under Article 25 of the WTO 
SCM Agreement.  In particular, Kazakhstan was asked whether there had been any administered programmes, other than the ones described in the preceding paragraphs, which provided industrial 
incentives or met the definition of a specific subs idy.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded 
that there were a number of other investment and industrial incentives provided for in Kazakhstan's National Programme of Accelerated Industrial and Innovative Development for 2010-
2014 approved by Decree of the President of Kazakhstan No. 1958 of 19 March 2010, including tax 
incentives, grants, research and development funding and concessional lending through the 
Development Bank of Kazakhstan and second-tier banks in priority sectors aimed at diversification of the national economy.  More specifically, La w No. 534-IV "On State Support of Industrial and 
Innovative Activities" of 9 January 2012 defined state measures aimed at supporting industrial and 
innovative projects, i.e., projects aimed at tran sfer of technologies, and creation of new and 
improved productions, technologies, goods and services.  
570.  A Member expressed the view that some of  the sectoral plans under the National 
Programme of Accelerated Industrial and Innovative Development for 2010-2014 - and more specifically, the plan for "granting of financial stimulation for improvement of export of 
Kazakhstan's mechanical engineering products" - might contain export contingent elements.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 129 - 
 
  This Member added that to the extent that incentives under the programme were export 
contingent, they would appear to be prohibited , as provided under Article 3 of the WTO SCM 
Agreement.  This Member asked how Kazakhstan planned to bring this programme into compliance with the WTO SCM Agreement prior to accession. 
571.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the National Programme on Accelerated 
Industrial and Innovative Development for 2010-2014 was a framework document that established the main directions and objectives of industrial  and innovative development of Kazakhstan for 
2010-2014.  The Programme outlined priority sectors for development, established objectives and 
targets in each of these sectors and outlined instruments that could be used to achieve these objectives and targets.  Concrete mechanisms aimed at implementing the objectives set in the National Programme were provided in separate legal acts and programmes such as the Programme 
"Business Road Map - 2020", the Programme "Productivity - 2020", and the Programme on 
Investment Attraction, Special Economic Zone Development and Export Promotion in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014.  In this regard, "f inancial stimulation for improving exports of 
Kazakhstan's mechanical engineering products" described a general target that had to be followed, 
but it did not prescribe a precise subsidy mechanism.  Financial stimulation, in this case, meant that producers of machinery products in Kazakhstan would receive subsidies that would allow 
producers to enlarge their production and improve th e quality of their products so they could sell 
their products not only on the domestic market, but could also export these products.  Specific subsidy schemes for mechanical engineering products were envisaged under the Programme "Productivity - 2020", the Programme "Business Road Map - 2020", as well as 
preferences within special economic zones (SEZs) and the free warehouse customs regimes.  
She stressed that these programmes did not provide for prohibited export subsidies.  
572.  The Programme "Business Road Map - 2020", approved by Government Resolution No. 301 
of 13 April 2010, provided a set of measures aimed at the development of new processing 
industries and the modernization of existing on es.  The Programme envisaged Government support 
in the form of partial guarantees for and subsidization of interest rates on commercial loans, 
development of industrial infrastructure, and service support of businesses.  The Programme 
"Productivity - 2020", approved by Government Resolution No. 254 of 14 March 2011, was aimed at increasing the competitiveness of industrial enterprises in priority sectors of the economy through increasing labour productivity.  The main mechanisms envisaged in this programme 
included innovation grants, financial leasing, grants for introduction of modern administrative and 
industrial technologies, grants for financing the development and expertise of comprehensive 
investment project plans.  Business entities an d entrepreneurs that had been implementing or 
planned to implement investment projects in non- extractive and priority sectors of the economy 
were eligible to receive preferences under these programmes.  
573.  To implement these programmes, Kazakhstan had established special development 
institutions and funds, including the Kazakhstan Investment Fund; the National Innovation Fund; 
and the "Damu" Entrepreneurship Development F und.  The representative of Kazakhstan added 
that Kazakhstan had made available to the Working Party the information on all of its subsidies under Article 25 of the WTO SCM Agreem ent in the form of notifications. 
574.  A Member stated that, according to the Programme "Productivity-2020", it appeared that 
participants of the Programme could be enterprises operating in a priority sector of the economy and performing activities aimed inter alia  at being "export oriented".  To the extent that incentives 
under this Programme were export contingent, they  would appear to be prohibited, as provided 
under Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement.   
575.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that entrepreneurs that met the 
following criteria could be eligible to receive subsidies under the Programme "Productivity - 2020": 
- implementing and/or planning to implement in vestment projects in priority sectors of the 
economy listed in Annex 1 to the Programme; 
- implementing and/or planning to implement production of goods listed in Annex 2 to the 
Programme, excluding entrepreneurs implementing investment projects in the sphere of 
rendering services on maintenance and installation of machines and equipment; 
- being financially stable (having no overdue debt on all kinds of obligations to the bank(s) 
or bank affiliate(s) and absence of tax debts, etc.);    WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 130 - 
 
  - presenting a comprehensive project implementation plan containing the following 
information: 
1. financial return on the investment project; 
2. increase in productivity; and, 
3. competitiveness of the product. 
576.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that eligibility criteria under the Programme 
"Productivity-2020" did not include local content or export performance requirements.  Thus, the 
subsidies provided under this Programme did not fa ll under the category of prohibited subsidies. 
577.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on the programmes aimed at 
export promotion, including trade financing and insurance, and service support of exports.  
This Member also enquired whether the terms of trade financing and insurance for export were 
coordinated with international norms for this kind of support.   
578.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that Government Resolution No. 1017 "On 
Approval of Rules of Partial Reimbursement of Co sts to Entities of Industrial and Innovative 
Activity on Promotion of Domestically Processed Goods, Services to External Markets, List of 
Domestically Processed Goods and Services Subjec t to Partial Reimbursement of External Markets 
Promotion Costs, and the Repeal of Some Resolu tions of the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 2 August 2012 (hereinafter: Government Resolution No. 1017) provided for partial 
reimbursement (50%) of expenses borne by companies engaged in industrial and innovative activities for promoting their goods and services ab road.  The following expenses could be partially 
compensated: marketing research, advertising costs, participation in foreign exhibitions, 
maintenance of overseas representatives, training of specialists, and registration of products and 
trademarks abroad.  The aim of the subsidy was to promote Kazakhstan's products in global markets.  At the same time, there was no requirement for these companies to export a certain 
amount of their products.  Thus, the conditions for receiving the subsidy were not contingent upon 
export performance and, correspondingly, the subsid y did not fall under the category of prohibited 
export subsidies in accordance with Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement. 
579.  Regarding the service support for exporters, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that it included a number of services aimed at supporting medium and small businesses in their ongoing and potential foreign trade activities.  The services included inter alia  marketing and 
analytical assistance, provision of information on demand in foreign markets, organization of 
launch events for promoting trademarks of Kazakhstan's producers.  In her view, the service 
support could not be considered as a prohibited subsidy because the scheme did not involve a financial contribution by the Government to specific enterprises or industries that was contingent 
upon export performance.   
580.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that state support for financing export operations 
was provided through JSC Export-Credit Insurance Corporation KazExpoGarant and included the 
following instruments:  (i) export credit insurance against commercial and political risks arising 
during implementation of export contracts with foreign importers; and, (ii) provision of post-export financing (export credits).  These financing instruments were provided based on international practices, including the OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits.  Thus, in her 
view, they were compliant with the rule s and norms of the WTO SCM Agreement. 
581.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on the Programme on 
Investment Attraction, Special Economic Zone Development and Export Promotion in the Republic 
of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014, including information on the eligibility criteria for companies to 
receive incentives under this Programme, focusing on export promotion programmes.  The Member also expressed concern that the Prog ramme listed as one of its tasks the "financial 
backing of exporters" and two of it s target indicators set to be reached by 2015 were:  (i) ensuring 
the export of at least 50% of the increased output of the SEZs; and (ii) increasing non-primary exports by at least 40%.  The Member sought specific assurances that none of the financial backing of exporters in this or Kazakhstan's other development programmes was intended to 
ensure or support the attainment of specific ex port performance targets of the recipient firms. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 131 - 
 
  582.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  most of the measures aimed at promoting 
investments and exports envisaged in the Programme on Investment Attraction, Special Economic Zone Development and Export Promotion in the Re public of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014, approved 
b y  G o v e r n m e n t  R e s o l u t i o n  N o .  1 1 4 5  o f  3 0  O c t o b e r  2 0 1 0 ,  did not represent a subsidy in 
accordance with the definition provided in the WTO SCM Agreement.  These measures included:  
(i) activities to assess the effectiveness of measures undertaken by the Government to improve the business climate; (ii) improvement of customs and border service activities; (iii) improvement 
of conditions of stay of foreign labour on the territory of Kazakhstan; (iv) monitoring the relevant 
government authorities' work with investors; (v) development of legal acts; (vi) service support for exporters; (vii) organization of trade missions and fairs abroad; and, (viii) publishing brochures 
and books on Kazakhstan's producers and their pr oducts.  She further explained that "financial 
backing of exporters" in the Programme referr ed to the state support of financing export 
operations through JSC Export Credit Insurance Corporation "KazExpoGarant" described in paragraph 580.  The target indicators:  "to ensu re the export of at least 50% of the increased 
output of the SEZs" and "to increase non-primary exports by at least 40%", set to be reached by 
2015, did not involve export subsidies.  These we re general targets for implementation of the 
Programme, and as such, they were not used as a condition for a particular subsidy measure.  
She added that the main purpose for establishing SEZs was the diversification of the economy 
through facilitating production of high value-added goods.  Therefore, State support measures provided within SEZs included tax and customs duty preferences aimed at attracting investments and stimulating production that were not contingent upon export performance. Detailed description 
of preferences applied in SEZs was provided in Chapter IV "Policies Affecting Trade in Goods", 
Section (C) "Internal Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Goods", Sub-section "Free Zones, Special Economic Areas" of this Report.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that 
preferences stipulated in Kazakhstan's development programmes, including the Programme on 
Investment Attraction, Special Economic Zone Development and Export Promotion in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014, were not contingent upon export performance, therefore, in her 
view, they did not represent prohibited export subsidies.  
583.  A Member expressed concern with regard to Kazakhstan's two subsidy programmes: 
"Business Road Map 2020" and Government Resoluti on No. 1017.  In his view, certain aspects of 
these programmes appeared to constitute prohibited export subsidies in accordance with the WTO 
SCM Agreement.  This Member sought Kazakhstan's review of this legislation and amendment 
prior to conclusion of the negotiations to eliminate the possibility of prohibited subsidization.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that in order to bring its subsidy 
programmes into compliance with the WTO SCM Agreement, the Government of Kazakhstan was 
working on introduction of amendments to these two legislative acts.  In particular, the target indicators in relation to export promotion and other references to export performance would be 
excluded from the Programme "Business Road Map 2020".  Government Resolution No. 1017 
would be abolished.  These amendments would be enacted by the date of Kazakhstan's accession 
to the WTO. 
584.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that it would eliminate all prohibited subsidies 
within the meaning of Article 3 of the WTO SC M Agreement and Article XVI of the GATT 1994, at 
all levels of the Government, which were contingent upon export performance or the use of domestic over imported goods as of the date of accession.  Kazakhstan was also asked to confirm 
that it would administer any subsidy programmes in place or established after accession at all 
levels of the Government in conformity with the WTO SCM Agreement.  This Member requested 
Kazakhstan to provide a draft of its subsidies notification under Article 25 of the WTO SCM 
Agreement to the Working Party for review, noting that it would be difficult to conclude discussions 
on this Sub-section: "Industrial Policy, including Subsidies", without it. 
585.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, except as otherwise provided in the 
Working Party Report, upon accession, Kazakhstan would eliminate all subsidies programmes, 
including provisions contained in its development programmes, administered within its territory 
falling within the scope of Article 3.1 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures or modify these programmes so that any subsidy provided would not be contingent, 
de jure or de facto , upon export performance, or on the use of domestic over imported goods.  
She also confirmed that any subsidy programme in place or established after accession within the territory of Kazakhstan would be administered in conformity with the WTO Agreement on Subsidies 
and Countervailing Measures.  In addition, the Republic of Kazakhstan would provide a subsidies 
notification prepared in accordance with Ar ticle 25 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 132 - 
 
  Countervailing Measures to the WTO Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures as 
provided for in Table 4 of this Report.  She also confirmed that Kazakhstan would not invoke any of the provisions of Articles 27 and 28 of th e WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification 
(a) Legal Framework 586.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that her country's legal framework for technical 
regulations, standards and conformity assessmen t systems had been governed by the national 
legislation of Kazakhstan until 1 January 2010.  At that time, international agreements of the Customs Union (CU) and other CU legal instruments also had become relevant.  As of 1 January 2015, the CU legal instruments were incorporated into the EAEU legal framework, 
including technical regulations of the CU which became technical regulations of the EAEU.  
This legal framework required certain products circulating in the territories of the EAEU member States to meet established technical regulations, as well as sanitary and phytosanitary 
(SPS) requirements established as technical regulations.  In particular, trade (including both 
importation and circulation in the domestic market) in products on the territory of Kazakhstan could be restricted or banned if the products in question did not meet these requirements.  
The EAEU member States had agreed to harmoniz e their policies and regulatory systems in the 
area of technical regulation and to intensify their cooperation in this area within the framework of the EAEU.  The goal of this harmonization was to  ensure uniform requirements for the circulation 
of goods within the territories of the EAEU memb er States in the area of technical regulation, 
through common technical regulations of the EAEU .  These technical regulations were applied 
directly in the territory of Kazakhstan, and no separate national legislation was necessary.  The provisions of the EAEU Tr eaty and other EAEU legal instruments were based on the WTO 
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (hereina fter: TBT Agreement), and technical regulations 
were applied with the purpose of protecting hum an life and/or health, property, environment, 
animal and plant life and/or health, and preventing actions that might mislead consumers, as well 
as for the purpose of ensuring energy efficiency  and saving resources.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan emphasized that technical regulation s adopted and applied within the EAEU were not 
adopted for any other purposes. 
587.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal basis for the common policy was 
Section X "Technical Regulation" and Annexes Nos. 9-11 of the EAEU Treaty. These provisions 
replaced the CU Agreement on Uniform Principles an d Rules of Technical Regulation in the Republic 
of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 18 November 2010; and the 
CU Agreement on the Circulation of Goods Subj ect to Mandatory Conformity Assessment on the 
Customs Territory of Customs Union of 11 Decemb er 2009, which were terminated when the EAEU 
Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015. The Regulation on Development, Adoption, 
Amendment and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union adopted by  EEC    
Council Decision No. 48 of 20 June 2012 (hereinafter: EEC Council Decision No. 48) remained in force.  From 1 January 2015 these provisions of the EAEU Treaty and EEC Council Decision No. 48 
established the main instruments of the common policy applied in Kazakhstan in the following 
areas: 
- harmonization of national legislation in the area of technical regulation; 
- development and adoption of technical regulations of the EAEU stipulating mandatory and 
binding requirements for the goods subject to technical regulation; 
- implementation of common procedure on development of technical regulations in the 
territory of each EAEU member State; 
- harmonization of standards and the implementation of relevant international standards as 
a basis for the elaboration of technical regulations; 
- implementation of common forms and rules for conformity assessment; 
- conducting conformity assessment (confirmat ion of compliance) of products or product-
related production processes, installation, setup, operation (use), storage, carrying 
(transportation), sale and disposal, including testing and certification;   
- accreditation of certification (confirmation of compliance) bodies and test laboratories 
(centres) participating in the process of mandatory confirmation of conformity; and, 
- coherent policies in the area of traceability.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 133 - 
 
  588.  She added that paragraph 7 of Annex No. 9 "Protocol on Technical Regulation within the 
Eurasian Economic Union" to the EAEU Treaty provided for the development of a unified list of goods subject to mandatory conformity assessment within the EAEU for which it was possible to issue a certificate and to register a declaratio n of conformity assessment using a common form 
during the transition period, until the adoption of  technical regulations of the EAEU.  The unified 
list had been established by CU Commission Decision No. 319 "On Technical Regulation in the Customs Union" of 18 June 2010 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 319) and later 
replaced by CU Commission Decision No. 620 "On th e New Version of the Unified List with Regard 
to Products Subject to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirmation of Compliance) within the Framework of the Customs Union with Issuance of  Single Documents, approved by CU Commission 
Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010" of 7 April 2011 (hereinafter: Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620).  The Unified List included products for which the 
EAEU member States:  (i) establis hed similar mandatory requirements; (ii) used similar conformity 
assessment schemes; and, (iii) used similar or comparable testing and measurement methods.  
Initially, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Expl anatory Note 1 to the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620, a declaration of conformity based on the EAEU common form could not be used for goods produced by foreign manufacturers located outside the territory of the 
EAEU.  However, CU Commission Decision No. 620 still provided for the possibility of using a 
certificate of conformity for such goods base d on the EAEU common form.  In Kazakhstan, a 
declaration of conformity for goods manufactured outside of Kazakhstan could be done under Law No. 603-II "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004 (hereafter: Law "On Technical 
Regulation"). 
589.  Some Members expressed concern that under CU Commission Decision No. 620 foreign 
manufacturers not located on the territory of the EAEU, in contrast to manufacturers located within 
the territory of the EAEU, did not have the option to use declarations of conformity based on the 
EAEU common form.  For these Members, this co nstituted discrimination in breach of the WTO 
TBT Agreement.  These Members sought a commi tment that Kazakhstan, by the date of its 
accession, would eliminate this discriminatory treatment. 
590.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in order to comply with the WTO TBT 
Agreement, and in particular Article 2.1 thereo f, discriminatory treatment had been eliminated 
through the amendment of CU Commission Decisi on No. 620 "On the New Version of the Unified 
List of Products Subject to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirmation of Compliance) within 
the Framework of the CU with Issuance of Single Documents, approved by CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010" of 7 April 2011, to ensure that foreign manufacturers not 
located within the territory of the EAEU would be able to demonstrate the conformity of the 
products imported into the territory of the EAEU through use of declarations of conformity using 
the EAEU common form.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.  
591.  The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the amendments to CU Commission 
Decision No. 620, which provided for a possibility for foreign manufacturers located outside the EAEU territory to demonstrate the conformity of products imported into the EAEU territory through the use of declaration of conformity of the EAEU  common  form, did not affect the possibility for 
foreign manufactures to issue declaration of conformity in accordance with national legislation of 
the EAEU member States (i.e., in Kazakhstan - in accordance with Law "On Technical Regulation").  Currently, in accordance with CU Commission De cision No. 620, depending on where the product 
was going to be circulated – in Kazakhstan or the EAEU, at the applicant's choice, conformity of 
goods produced by foreign manufacturers lo cated outside the EAEU territory could be 
demonstrated either through the use of declaration of conformity of the EAEU common form, or 
declaration of conformity in accordance with the national legislation of the EAEU member State. 
592.  The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that CU Commission Decision No. 319 
also determined the criteria for inclusion of conf ormity assessment bodies and testing laboratories 
in the Unified Register of Certification Bodies and Testing Laboratories of the CU (hereinafter: 
Unified Register) and established the rules for development and maintenance of the Unified List 
approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 and the Unified Register by national authorized 
bodies.  CU Commission Decision No. 319 also established the regulations for importation of 
products listed in the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620.  Currently, the 
new "Regulation on the Procedures for Importation to the Customs Union Territory of Goods (Products) in Respect of which Mandatory Requirements are Established within the Customs Union" 
had been adopted by EEC Collegium Decision No. 294 of 25 December 2012 (hereinafter: WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 134 - 
 
  Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Good s).  Annex No. 11 "Protocol on Acceptance of the 
Results of Works on Accreditation of the Conformi ty Assessment Bodies" to the EAEU Treaty, which 
replaced the Agreement on Mutual Recognition of Accreditation of Certification (Assessment (Confirmation of Compliance)) Bodies and Test La boratories (Centres) that Perform Work on the 
Assessment (Confirmation of Compliance) of 11 De cember 2009, stipulated the principles for a 
common EAEU system of mutual recognition of  accreditation, the responsibilities of the 
accreditation bodies of the EAEU member States, and general principles of accreditation, pending 
gradual replacement of this mutual recognition system by adoption and application of common 
technical regulations of the EAEU by the EAEU member States. 
593.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on the provisions of the new 
regulation governing importation of products to the EAEU territory.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods 
established unified procedures for importation of products, included in: (i) the Unified List of Products, in Respect of Which Mandatory Requirements are Established within the Framework of 
the Customs Union, approved by CU Commis sion Decision No. 526 of 28 January 2011 
(hereinafter:  Unified List of Products approved  by CU Commission Decision No. 526); (ii) the 
Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620; and, (iii) the lists of products for which 
a customs declaration had to be submitted to customs authority along with a document confirming 
compliance with mandatory requirements.  The Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods elaborated in detail the provisions of the currently applied regulation, adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 319.  The Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods stipulated the list of 
customs procedures, under which customs authorities required submission of documents 
confirming compliance of products (goods) with mandatory requirements or information about such documents (production for domestic consumption, temporary importation, free customs zone, 
free warehouse, re-import).  Moreover, the Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods 
specified categories of products (goods), for which submission of documents confirming the compliance of products (goods) with mandatory requirements or information concerning such 
documents was not required.  These categories, for example, included used goods, and goods 
imported in limited quantities for personal  use or for scientific research purposes. 
594.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify the difference between the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620 and the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision 
No. 526.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620 was provisionally applied in order to ensure free movement of goods on the EAEU territory until adoption of relevant technical regulations of the EAEU.  
It included products for wh ich EAEU member States:  
- established similar mandatory requirements;  
- used similar conformity assessment schemes; and, 
- used similar or comparable testing and measurement methods.  
595.  In accordance with the Explanatory Notes to the Unified List approved by CU Commission 
Decision No. 620, for products included in the list, at the applicant's choice, certificates of conformity or declarations of conformity of the EAEU common form, or certificates of conformity or 
declarations of conformity issued according to th e national legislation of the EAEU member States, 
could be used.  Products included in the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 could move freely within the entire EAEU territory if they had undergone conformity assessment 
procedures in one of the EAEU member States and the following conditions were met: 
- certificates of conformity or declarations of conformity of the EAEU common form were 
issued;  
- the certifying body was included in the Unified Register of Certification Bodies and 
 Testing Laboratories of the EAEU; and, - the testing laboratory was included in the Unified Register of Certification Bodies and  Testing Laboratories of the EAEU.  
She further clarified that in accordance with CU  Commission Decision No. 620, as amended by EEC 
Collegium Decision No. 69 of 13 May 2014, applicants had an opportunity to choose between the conformity confirmation documents of the EA EU common form or conformity confirmation 
documents issued in accordance with the legislation of the EAEU member States.  However, the 
form of conformity assessment that could be used for a particular product, i.e., whether it had to WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 135 - 
 
  be declaration of conformity or certification, was established in the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620 and it was not per applicant's choice.  In particular, in the Unified List for each product there was reference indicating what form of the conformity assessment procedures had to be used: (i) certification; (ii) declaration of conformity based on evidence 
acquired with the third party participation; and (iii) declaration of conformity based on applicant's 
own evidence.  Conformity assessment form for each product was established based on the level of risk that a particular product posed to human life and health. 
596.  Products not included in the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 
were subject to mandatory conformity assessment (confirmation of conformity) according to the national legislation of the EAEU member States.  Products for which technical regulations of the EAEU were adopted had to be excluded from the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision 
No. 620.  She further explained that the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526 
included product groups for which technical regu lations of the EAEU had to be developed.  
For products included in the Unified List approv ed by CU Commission Decision No. 526, for which 
no relevant technical regulations of the EAEU had been yet enforced, EAEU member States applied 
national technical regulations.  However, the EAEU member States could not apply national technical regulations to products not included in the Unified List approved by CU Commission 
Decision No. 526. 
597.  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that in accordance with paragraph 1 of 
Article 52 of the EAEU Treaty, technical regulation s of the EAEU could only be developed for goods 
included into the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526.  The list included 61 
product groups, including:  (i) machinery and equipment; (ii) low-voltage equipment, (iii) high-
voltage equipment; (iv) devices operating on gaseous fuels; (v) equipment operating under excess pressure; (vi) agricultural machinery; (vii) products of light industry; (viii) toys; (ix) tobacco 
products; (x) furniture; (xi) packaging; (xii) animal feedstuff; (xiii) personal protection equipment; 
(xiv) detergents; (xv) food products; (xvi) coal and its products, etc.  The list could be expanded by decisions of the Commission if new risks were id entified.  Thus, the Unified List approved by the 
CU Commission Decision No. 526, had been amended by EE С Council Decision No. 102 of 
23 November 2012.  In particular, six product groups had been added to the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526: (i) liquefied petroleum gas used as fuel; (ii) materials contacting human skin; (iii) products intended for civil defence and protection of natural and man-
made disasters; (iv) oil, prepared for transportation and use; (v) combustible natural gas, 
prepared for transportation and use; and, (vi) ma inline pipelines for transportation of liquid and 
gaseous hydrocarbons.  One product group – alternative fuels – had been excluded from the 
Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision  No. 526.  Thus, at present, the Unified List 
included 66 product groups. She further explained that for products included into the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526, for which no relevant technical regulations of the 
EAEU had been enforced, national technical regula tions were applied.  The EAEU member States 
could not at the national level maintain mandatory requirement to products not included in the Unified List approved by CU Commission Deci sion No. 526. The Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 526 is provided in Annex 18 of this Report.  Of these initial 
61 products included in the list, 47 had been iden tified as priority products for development and 
adoption of technical regulations of the EAEU.  The schedule for development of priority technical 
regulations of the EAEU was provided in CU Commission Decision No. 492 "On Schedule of 
Development of Priority Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" of 8 December 2010  
(hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 492).  By  the end of 2012, of 47 technical regulations of 
the EAEU stipulated in CU Commission Decision No. 492, 31 technical regulations had been 
adopted.  Sixteen technical regulations of the EAEU  (out of 47 technical regulations) that had not 
been developed by that time were included in  the new "Schedule of Development of Technical 
Regulations of the Customs Union for 2012-2013" adopted by EEC Council Decision No. 103 of 
23 November 2012 (hereinafter: EEC Council Decision No. 103).  The new schedule envisaged the 
development of 29 technical regulations.  Kazakhstan was responsible for the development of 
seven draft technical regulations.  As of May 2014,  34 technical regulations of the EAEU had been 
adopted and 26 technical regulations had entered into force.  The remaining eight technical 
regulations would enter into force no later than 15 February 2015. 
598.  A Member enquired about the criteria that were used to place 61 products on the Unified 
List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
the Unified List of Products for which Mandatory Requirements were Established within the 
Framework of the EAEU was formed on the basis of proposals from EAEU member States, including WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 136 - 
 
  stakeholders and the business community, as well as proposals of the Commission.  Initially, 
national lists of products subject to mandatory conformity assessment of the EAEU member States 
were used as a basis for development of the Unified List of Products for which Mandatory Requirements were Established within the Framework of the EAEU.  For determining products to be 
included in the List, the EAEU member States assessed the risk (potential hazard) that these 
products posed to human life and/or health, envi ronment, animal and plant life and/or health.  
New products could be added to the List if new ri sks were identified.  In forming the Unified list, 
the EAEU member States mainly focused on mutually traded products.  A draft consolidated List of 
Goods for which Mandatory Requirements were Established within the Framework of the EAEU, prepared by the Department of Technical Regulati on and Accreditation of the EEC on the basis of 
proposals from the EAEU member States, was circulated to the member States for review.  
When approved by the EAEU member States, the draft list was considered by the Consultative 
Committee on Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures.  Upon endorsement of the Committee, the draft list had to be submitted to the EEC 
Collegium and then to the EEC Council for approval.  Similar procedures were used to introduce 
amendments into the Unified List approved by  CU Commission Decision No. 620 (inclusion and 
exclusion of products in/from the Unified List).   
599.  Once technical regulations of the EAEU came in to effect, they applied with direct effect, 
and relevant national requirements, established by laws of the EAEU member States, could no longer be applied on the territories of those member States.  In order to implement this provision, national technical regulations for products towards which relevant technical regulations were 
a d o p t e d ,  w e r e  r e p e a l e d  b y  a  r e s o l u t i o n  o f  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n .   
The EAEU member States ensured release of products that conformed to EAEU technical regulations into circulation without laying out additional requirements other than those contained 
in the technical regulations of the EAEU and with out carrying out additional conformity assessment 
procedures.  In order to ensure the comparability of conformity assessment results with technical regulations of the EAEU, the EAEU member States carried out coordinated policy aimed at ensuring 
measurements uniformity.  As of May 2014, the Commission had adopted 34 priority technical 
regulations which would enter into force no later than 15 February 2015, after a transitional period 
which allowed producers, importers and exporters to become acquainted with the new technical regulations prior to their application.  By that date, all other national mandatory technical 
requirements applied on the territories of the EAEU member States would be replaced by technical 
regulations of the EAEU or wo uld no longer be applied. 
600.  The domestic legislative framework for technical regulation, standardization, certification 
and accreditation in Kazakhstan was based on Law "On Technical Regulation", which had replaced 
Laws No. 433-I "On Standardization" of 16 July 1999 and No. 434-I "On Certification" of 16 July 1999.  In her view, the Law took into account the main principles of the WTO TBT 
Agreement, including, inter alia,  national treatment, transparency, and priority consideration given 
to international standards in drawing up domestic technical regulations and standards.  Law "On Technical Regulation" was the basis for the development of technical regulations, standards, procedures for recognition of conformity assessment and accreditation; it was aimed at setting a 
balance between the degree of government interven tion and the goal of protecting the public.  
The two main objectives of the Law were:  (i) to ensure safety of products through application of 
mandatory technical regulations; and (ii) to enhance product competitiveness through application 
of voluntary standards.  The Law also ensured that ratified international agreements had priority 
over the national legislation.  Existing legislat ion in the area was being brought into conformity 
with Law "On Technical Regulation" and provisions of the WTO TBT Agreement.  To this end, Law 
No. 209-III "On Amendments and Addenda into Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Issues of Technical Regulation" of 29 December 2006 had introduced amendments 
to 33 laws.  In addition, four laws had been adopted:  Law No. 306-III "On Safety of Toys" of 21 July 2007, Law No. 302-III "On Safety of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007, Law No. 305-III 
"On Safety of Machinery and Equipment" of 21 Ju ly 2007 and Law No. 301-III "On Food Safety" 21 
July 2007.  In the area of accreditation, two laws had been adopted: Law No. 61-IV "On Accreditation in the Field of Conformity Assessment" of 5 July 2008 and Law No. 62-IV 
"On Amendments and Addenda into Certain Legislat ive Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Issues of Accreditation" of 5 July 2008.  Thes e Laws were aimed at building the legal framework 
for accreditation and harmonizing accreditation requirements with international standards, 
including those of the International Accreditation Forum (IAF) and the International Laboratory 
Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC).  In addition, new regulatory acts on technical regulation were WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 137 - 
 
  being developed and existing ones were being revise d.  She held the view that the provisions of 
the national legislation in this area could not constitute a barrier to trade. 
601.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that with the establishment of the CU regime on 
1 January 2010, and the entry into force of th e EAEU Treaty on 1 January 2015, EAEU legal 
instruments implementing the EAEU policy on technical regulation substantially had replaced Law 
"On Technical Regulation" as the overall legal framework for technical regulations, standards, and conformity assessment systems in Kazakhstan.  However, certain provisions of Law "On Technical 
Regulation" remained in effect to the extent they did not conflict with the relevant EAEU legal 
instruments, including Commission Decisions.  Development and application of standards, conformity assessment, State control and supervision,  metrological control, and liability issues in 
Kazakhstan would continue to be administered at  the national level under the EAEU regime, with 
regard to the following issues: 
- national standards within the meaning of the WTO TBT Agreement (development, 
adoption) and standards of organizations;  
- State control and supervision (inspection) to ensure compliance with the requirements of 
technical regulations; 
- assurance of uniformity of measurements; 
- violations of technical regulations and withdr awal of products from the domestic market;  
- operation of the national aspects of developing and maintaining the system of certificates 
of conformity assessment and declarations of conformity, including national part of the 
Unified Register of certificates and declarations; 
- operation of the national aspects of developing and maintaining the system of certification 
bodies and testing laboratories (centres) of the EAEU, including accreditation and national 
part of the Unified Register of certification bodies and testing laboratories; 
- voluntary conformity assessment;  
- rights and obligations of applicants in the field of mandatory conformity assessment;  
- coordination of activities, positions and procedures of the Government in the field of 
technical regulation; 
- procedures for determination of liability in the case of violation of technical regulations and 
sanctions until the decision to transfer these issues to the EAEU was made; 
- providing required transparency; and, 
- financing in the field of technical regulation. 
602.  Asked to elaborate on the status of Kazakhstan's other legislation after 1 January 2010, 
the representative of Kazakhstan noted that the national legislation in the field of the technical 
regulation had been brought into compliance wi th the CU, and after 1 January 2015, with the 
EAEU legislation.  In particular, Law No. 31-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Technical Regulation and Metrology" had been 
adopted on 10 July 2012.  This Law had introduc ed amendments and addenda to eight codes and 
22 laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Law No. 31-IV had excluded the Government's competence to adopt technical regulations due to the development of common technical regulations of the EAEU and transfer of the author ity to adopt technical regulations of the EAEU to 
the Commission.  The Government of the Republic  of Kazakhstan only reviewed and approved 
draft technical regulations of the EAEU prior to their adoption by the Commission.  The Law had also provided for harmonization of terms in the field of technical regulation with the EAEU 
legislation.  In particular, the terms 'state system of technical regulation', 'register of state system 
of technical regulation', 'compulsory certificatio n', 'uniform state fund', 'normative technical 
documents', 'documents in the field of conformity confirmation', 'standard', 'testing laboratory', 
'standard of the organization' were introduced or modified.  Moreover, the Law had introduced new 
provisions to Law "On Technical Regulation" that reflected Kazakhstan's commitments undertaken in the course of WTO accession process and were aimed at bringing the national legislation in line with international practice.  In particular, the new article on the Information Centre reflected 
Kazakhstan's commitment under the WTO TBT Agreement to establish an enquiry and notification 
point.  Article 24 of the amended Law provided fo r an application of international and regional 
standards, recommendations and guidelines, and normative documents of foreign countries.  
Moreover, the new article on Uniform State Fund of Normative Technical Documents that contained 
information on all adopted standards, classifiers of technical and economic information and normative technical documents had been introduced by Law No. 31-IV into Law "On Technical 
Regulation".  On 1 January 2015, the CU authorities in the sphere of technical regulation were 
transferred to the EAEU. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 138 - 
 
  (b) Institutions 
603.  Section X and Annexes Nos. 9-11 to the EAEU Treaty provided for the transfer of a 
substantial share of competences in the field of technical regulation from the national level to the EAEU level.  In particular, each EAEU member State delegated the authority to establish 
mandatory State requirements for products to the Commission, i.e., sovereign rule-making in this 
area was excluded.  None of the member States was eligible to establish additional mandatory requirements at the national level other than those established in the technical regulations of the 
EAEU. 
604.  As of 2 February 2012, when the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Commission of 
18 November 2011 had been enacted, the competences of the CU Commission had been transferred to the EEC.  According to the Treaty, the competences in the field of technical 
regulation were divided between the EEC Council , responsible for the overall regulation of 
integration processes, and the EEC Collegium, the executive body of the EEC that made proposals 
for further integration.  The EEC Coun cil exercised the following functions: 
- approval of the Unified List of Products for which Mandatory Requirements were 
Established within the Framework of the EAEU , and of the procedure for its maintenance; 
- approval of plans for development of  technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- adoption, amendment and cancellation of technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- approval of the common forms of confor mity assessment (confirmation) documents  
(declaration of conformity with the techni cal regulations of the EAEU, certificate of 
conformity with the technical regulations of the EAEU); 
- establishment of the procedure for developmen t, adoption, amendment and cancellation of 
technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- approval of the Common Mark of Circulation of Products on the Markets of the member 
States of the EAEU; and, 
- approval of the regulation on the Common Ma rk of Circulation of Products on the Markets 
of the member States of the EAEU and the procedure for its use. 
The EEC Council adopted its decisions by consensu s.  The EEC Collegium approved, by a qualified 
majority: 
- the list of international and regional standards, and in case of their absence, national 
(State) standards, application of which, on a voluntary basis, ensured compliance with the 
technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- procedures for development of the list of international and regional standards, and in case 
of their absence, national (State) standards, th e application of which, on a voluntary basis, 
ensured compliance with the technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- standard schemes of conformity assessment (confirmation); and, 
- approval of the regulation on procedure of importation into the customs territory of the 
EAEU of products for which mandatory requirements were established within the 
framework of the EAEU. 
605.  The EEC Collegium was responsible for implementation of the EEC Council Decisions.  
In the field of technical regulation its work was conducted by the Department on Technical 
Regulation and Accreditation.  In addition, EEC Collegium Decision No. 11 of 7 March 2012 had 
established the Consultative Committee on Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (hereinafter: Consultative Committee).  The Consultative Committee was 
an advisory body that developed proposals for the EEC Collegium on technical regulations and 
application of sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary measures on the basis of agreed positions of the authorized bodies of the EAEU member States.  Sub-committees were established under the 
Consultative Committee, including the Sub-committee on Standardization and Uniformity of 
Measurements.   
606.  In response to a specific question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan 
explained that the change of the CU Commissi on to the EEC on 1 July 2012 did not lead to 
changes in Kazakhstan's legal basis in the field of technical regulations.  The creation of the EEC 
involved only changes in the structure of the Commission and its decision-making process.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 139 - 
 
  607.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that draft technical regulations were developed in 
member States using internal procedures before being proposed by the authorized national bodies in the field of technical regulation to the designat ed EAEU bodies for harmonization, further review, 
and adoption as provided for in the relevant international agreements or decisions.  In the 
EAEU framework, the coordination and transparency  functions were fulfilled by the Consultative 
Committee, which received draft technical regulations from the authorized bodies of the EAEU member States, coordinated the development of draft texts and resolved disputes 
concerning them among the EAEU member States' au thorities.  The Consultative Committee, with 
the assistance of the Commission, circulated the draft technical regulations for public review and comments, and prepared analysis and recommendations on the draft technical regulations before forwarding the proposals for adoption by the Commission. 
608.  At the national level, the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry 
of Investments and Development  of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter: Committee on 
Technical Regulation) was the competent authority in the field of technical regulation.  
Its competences were stipulated in Article 7 of Law "On Technical Regulation", and included, 
among others:  (i) participation in development of the State system of technical regulation; (ii) implementation of the State policy in the field of technical regulation; (iii) cross-sectoral 
coordination of activities of public authorities, na tural and juridical persons in the field of technical 
regulation; (iv) representation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in international and regional organizations for standardization, conformity a ssessment and accreditation; (v) organization and 
coordination of work on State control over compliance with requirements established by technical 
regulations; (vi) establishment of procedures  for the development, registration, approval, 
verification, amendment, termination and enactment of national standards; and, 
(vii) establishment of national forms of certificates  of conformity and declarations of conformity.  
The Committee on Technical Regulation had three subordinate organizations:  the Institute of 
Metrology, the Institute for Standardization and Certification and the National Center for Accreditation.  The Institute of Metrology was a national institution with the primary task of 
improving the technical (etalon) base and harmonization of normative documents in the field of 
metrology to ensure uniformity of measurements with international requirements.  The Institute for Standardization and Certification was created for development and enhancement of the legal and normative basis in the field of technical regula tion in order to ensure safety and quality of 
products, works and services, and its harmonization with international requirements.  The National 
Center for Accreditation was a national accreditation body that carried out its activities under Law No. 61-IV "On Accreditation in the Field of  Conformity Assessment" of 5 July 2008.  
(c) Technical Regulations, International and National Standards, and Conformity 
Assessment Procedures 
- (i) Technical Regulations 
609.  The technical regulations of the EAEU were ad opted only with the pu rpose of protecting 
human, animal and plant life or health, property, and the environment; ensuring energy efficiency 
and resource saving; and preventing practices that might mislead consumers (paragraph 1 of Article 52 of the EAEU Treaty).  The EAEU member States were not allowed to adopt technical 
regulations of the EAEU for any other purposes.  Technical regulations of the EAEU established 
requirements for products and product-related processes of design, production, installation, 
maintenance, operation, storage, transportation, realization and utilization, as well as identification 
rules and conformity assessment forms and schemes, and could also contain requirements for 
terminology, packaging, labelling and sanitary re quirements and procedures, as well as veterinary-
sanitary and quarantine phytosanitary requirements of a general nature.  Technical regulations of 
the EAEU had to be developed in accordance with recommendations on a model structure laid 
down inDecision of the Interstate Council of th e Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) No. 321 
of 27 October 2006, which was still used even though technical regulations were not developed through the EurAsEC institutions, because no recommendation on the model structure of the 
technical regulations had been adopted within the EAEU.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
affirmed that paragraph 3 of Annex No. 9 to the EAEU Treaty established that the relevant international standards and other documents (i.e., rules, directives and recommendations or any 
other documents accepted by international standardizing organizations) would be used as the 
basis for elaboration of technical regulations of the EAEU, except in cases where such documents were absent, or did not conform to the purposes of the technical regulations of the EAEU, in 
particular, due to climatic and geographical factors or technological and other particularities.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 140 - 
 
  CU Commission Decision No. 527 "On Normative Acts of the Commission of the Customs Union in 
the Field of Technical Regulation" of 28 January 2011, which stipulated regulations for development, adoption, amendment and cancellation of technical regulations on the territories of the member States, had been replaced by a new regulation adopted by EEC Council Decision 
No. 48.  The new Regulation stipulated in more detailed way provisions on development of draft 
technical regulations, including public consultation procedures, preparation of draft technical regulations with due account of comments and prop osals provided during public consultations.  
She further noted that currently the EurAsEC did not play any role in technical regulation for the 
EAEU.  Development of EurAsEC technical regula tions had been suspended by Decision of the 
EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 575 "On Elimination of Technical Barriers in Mutual Trade between 
EurAsEC Member States on the Basis of the System  of Technical Regulation of the Customs Union" 
of 19 October 2011.  Currently, only technical regulations of the EAEU were being developed. 
610.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in accordance with EEC Council Decision 
No. 48, technical regulations of the EAEU were  developed in accordance with the plan on 
development of technical regulations.  The plan was prepared on the basis of proposals from the 
EAEU member States or the EEC, agreed by the member States and approved by the EEC Council.  The member State (or the Commission) responsible for the development of a draft technical 
regulation was designated in the plan.  The memb er State responsible for the development of the 
draft technical regulation designated a state bo dy responsible for the development of the draft 
technical regulation (hereinafter: Developer of the draft technical regulation).  All EAEU member States determined the State bodies participating in the development of the draft technical 
regulations.  The State body was selected taking into account the relevant competence of the 
State body in the sphere where the technical regulation was planned to be developed.  In Kazakhstan, the Committee on Technical Re gulation had developed a draft document "On 
Designation of State Bodies Responsible for Develo pment of Technical Regulations of the EAEU".  
The draft document was sent to State bodies for approval and was adopted by the Commission on the Issues of Technical Regulation and Metrology established by Government Resolution No. 558 of 
12 June 2010.  To date, Kazakhstan had developed nine technical regulations of the EAEU with the 
following State bodies designated as the Developers of the draft technical regulation: 
- On Safety of Grain - the Ministry of Agriculture; 
- On Safety of Meat and Meat Produc ts – the Ministry of Agriculture; 
- On Safety of Elevators - the Ministry of Internal Affairs; 
- On Safety of Explosives and Products th ereof - the Ministry of Internal Affairs; 
- On Safety of Equipment Working under Excess Pr essure – the Ministry of Internal Affairs;  
- On Requirements to Automotive and Aviation Petrol, Diesel Fuel, Fuel for Jet Engines and 
Fuel Oil – the Ministry of Energy; 
- On Safety of Products of Light Industry – the Ministry of Investments and Development; 
- On Safety of Products of Dietary, Special and Medicinal and Prophylactic Nutrition – the 
Ministry of Public Health and Social Development; and, 
-  O n  S a f e t y  o f  F o o d  A d d i t i v e s ,  F l a v o u r i n g s  a n d Processing Aids – the Ministry of Public 
Health and Social Development. 
611.  The Developer of the draft technical regulati on prepared the first draft and, based on 
proposals from the competent authorities of the EAEU member States, formed a working group for the development of the draft technical regulation.  The working group included representatives of 
standardization bodies, industry and business re presentatives.  The Developer of the draft 
technical regulation informed the EEC and EAEU member States about the creation and composition of the working group. 
612.  In reply to a specific question, the represen tative of Kazakhstan explained that under 
official EAEU procedures, natural and juridical pe rsons of EAEU member States could propose draft 
technical regulations and submit supporting material s for their development, but they could not act 
as an official Developer of the draft technical regula tion of the EAEU.  In accordance with Article 25 
of Law "On Technical Regulation", natural and juridical persons could participate in the working 
groups and could submit proposals on draft tech nical regulations, as well as their own draft 
technical regulations, to the national body re sponsible for development of the draft technical 
regulation.  Moreover, natural and juridical person s could also submit proposals on development, 
amendment, cancellation of technical regulations and standards, and draft normative acts in the 
field of technical regulation to the Committee on Technical Regulation.  Upon their review, the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 141 - 
 
  Committee on Technical Regulation would submit the consolidated proposal from Kazakhstan to 
the EEC.  
613.  Upon completion of the first draft technical re gulation, the Developer of the draft technical 
regulation sent the draft, an explanatory note, and the notification on development of the technical 
regulation to the EEC (electronic and hard copies ).  The explanatory note to the draft technical 
regulation had to include: 
- the purpose of the technical regulation; 
- structure and general characteristics of the object of the technical regulation; 
- main groups of business or other activities, other interested persons whose interests would 
be affected by the technical regulation; 
- a list of international, regional and nation al (State) standards, requirements of other 
documents (regulations, directives and recommendations and other documents adopted by 
international organizations), and in case of their absence, regional documents (regulations, 
directives, decisions, and other documents), and/or national technical regulations, on the 
basis of which the draft technical regulation was developed; 
- requirements that differed from provisions of international, regional standards or 
mandatory requirements in force on the territory of the member States with a brief 
rationale for their introduction; 
- information on the compliance of the draft technical regulation with the requirements 
ensuring the uniformity of measurements; and, 
- the expected date of implementation of th e requirements established by the technical 
regulation. 
Notification on the development of the draft tech nical regulation had to be made in accordance 
with the prescribed form and include the following information: 
- the member State responsible for the development of the draft; 
- the authorized body of the member State th at was responsible for the development of the 
draft (the Developer of the draft technical regulation); 
- draft title of the technical regulation; 
- object of the technical regulation; 
- purpose of the development of the technical regulation; 
- reason for the development of the technical regulation; 
- mailing address, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address for comments and 
proposals (reviews) on the draft; and, 
- expected date of completion of public consultations (final date for providing comments and 
proposals (reviews) on the draft). 
The EEC sent these documents to the member States within five working days from the date of 
receipt of the mentioned materials. 
614.  The EEC ensured the consideration of the first version of the draft technical regulation and 
set of related documents at the meeting of the Consultative Committee.  Following the consideration by the Consultative Committee, the decision on possibility, starting date and period of public consultations on the draft technical regulation was made, which was formalized by a 
Protocol.  If necessary, the Developer of the draft technical regulation within the period established 
by the Consultative Committee revised the draft technical regulation and set of related documents.  
615.  The notification on the draft technical regulation was published on the official websites of 
the Commission (http://www.eurasi ancommission.org/en/act/te xnreg/deptexre g/tr/Pages/ 
projectsPublic.aspx), the Committee for Te chnical Regulation (http://www.memst.kz/ 
en/discussion/discTRTS/index.php), the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS (http://wto.memst.kz/en/ 
information/distrts/index.php), as well as in the official publication "Bulletin of the Enquiry Point on 
TBT and SPS".  The Enquiry Point would notify the WTO of a draft technical regulation that would affect international trade approximately at the same time when it was published for public consultations.
  This would allow the synchronization of the receipt of comments through both 
mechanisms.   The representative of Kazakhstan also clarified that in cases when the deadline 
established in the notification to the WTO exceeded the public consultation period, the EAEU member States would still continue to consider comments received from WTO Members. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 142 - 
 
  616.  The period of public consultations of the draft technical regulation (from the moment of 
publication of notification on the development up to the moment of publication of notification on 
the completion of public consultations) had to be no less than 60 calendar days.  The public consultation period was closed by publishing a notification on the closure of public consultations on 
the draft technical regulation on the official we bsite of the EEC.  The EEC processed comments and 
proposals received from interested parties during public consultations and sent them to the Developer of the draft technical regulation. 
617.  The Developer of the draft technical regulation  within 30 working days from the date it 
received consolidated comments from the EEC, revised the draft technical regulation and related documents taking into account comments and proposals received during the public consultations.  The revised draft technical regulation, the protocol  of the meetings of the working group, and the 
consolidated comments were sent to the EEC.  The EEC sent the draft technical regulation and 
related documents to the member States for their internal approval and published them on the official website of the Commission.  Upon completion  of the internal approval of the draft technical 
regulation by the member States, the draft technical regulation was sent to the Consultative 
Committee that submitted it to the EEC Collegium for approval.  The draft technical regulation and related documents, and disagreements that could not be solved during the negotiations were 
considered by the EEC Collegium.  After the cons ideration, the EEC Collegium submitted the draft 
technical regulation and related documents either to the EEC Council for approval, or to the Developer of the draft technical regulation for re vision.  The EEC Council adopted the final draft 
technical regulation at its meeting.  
618.  The decision of the EEC Council on adoption of the technical regulation, decision of the 
EEC Collegium on approval of the draft technical regulation and decision of the EEC Collegium on 
the order of entering into force of the technical regulation were published at the official website of 
the EEC.  The EEC maintained the Register of technical regulations.  Kazakhstan's Enquiry Point on 
TBT and SPS would send a copy of the final technical regulation to the WTO Members upon request, as it was provided in Article 10 of the WTO TBT Agreement. 
619.  In response to the request of a Member to explain the full role that Law "On Technical 
Regulation" played in laying out the responsibi lities of the Developer of the draft technical 
regulation, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that Law "On Technical Regulation" contained general provisions on the development of technical regulations.  In accordance with the 
Law, State bodies authorized to establish mandatory rules and norms had to prepare proposals on 
development, amendment or cancellation of technical regulations taking into account proposals of interested parties, and had to submit them to  the Committee on Technical Regulation.  The Law 
stipulated the following obligations of the Developer of the draft technical regulation: 
- to publish notifications on the development of draft technical regulations, amendments 
and/or addenda, or cancellation of technical regulations, in the official publications and 
public information system no later than a month after the beginning of development of 
draft technical regulations, amendments and/or addenda, or cancellation of technical regulations; 
- to organize public consultations on draft technical regulations; 
- to revise draft technical regulations taking into account received comments;  
- to publish technical regulations in the official publication of the authorized body and public  information system; and, 
- to provide answers to comments received during the public consultations to the interested 
 parties at their request. 
620.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the EAEU member States could 
not establish additional mandatory requirements at the national level other than those established 
in the technical regulations of the EAEU.  Thus, no  national technical regulations were developed in 
Kazakhstan at the moment.  Provisions of Law "On Technical Regulation" were applied to the extent that they did not contradict the provisions  of the EAEU Treaty and Commission Decisions.  
The Law envisaged mandatory requirements for (i) products aimed at ensuring the protection of 
human life and health, environment, national security, as well as the prevention of deceptive practices; and, (ii) related processes aimed at ensuring product safety.  Technical regulations set 
forth mandatory requirements for products and processes, contained an exhaustive list of such 
requirements, and had the status of direct applic ation.  These requirements were applied in an 
equal and uniform manner regardless of the products' country or place of origin.  Development of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 143 - 
 
  technical regulations was based on international and regional standards.  Technical regulations 
were also aimed at eliminating technical barriers to trade and increasing product competitiveness. 
621.  In response to the enquiry of a Member whether any of Kazakhstan's laws referred to "sets 
of rules" as a form of mandatory requirement, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that there 
was no reference to "sets of rules" in the national legislation of Kazakhstan.   
622.  In response to a specific question, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan explained that in 
Kazakhstan, technical requirements in the fields of telecommunication and nuclear energy were 
subject to Law "On Technical Regulation".  The mandatory requirements to products and/or 
processes of their life cycle were established in the following national technical regulations:  
- in the field of nuclear energy:  "Nuclear and Radiation Safety of Nuclear Power Plants", 
approved by Government Resolution No. 683 of 1 July 2010; "Nuclear and Radiation Safety 
of Nuclear Research Facilities", approved by Government Resolution of No. 684 of 
1 July 2010; and "Nuclear and Radiation Safety", approved by Government Resolution No. 768 of 30 July 2010; and, 
- in the field of telecommunications:  "Gener al Requirements for Safety, Functional and 
 Technical Requirements for Telecommunication Equipment During Search Operations",  approved by Government Resolution No. 805 of 6 August 2010. 
- (ii) Technical Requirements Not Subject to Law No. 603-II "On Technical 
 Regulation" of 9 November 2004 
623.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on mandatory technical 
requirements that were not regulated under Law "On Technical Regulation", and how the 
requirements of the WTO TBT Agreement were applied in these areas.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that safety requirements in the field of civil aviation were 
not regulated by Law "On Technical Regulation" and were regulated by national legislation in the 
field of civil aviation.  Kazakhstan was a party to the Convention on International Civil Aviation 
(hereinafter: CICA) since 1992 and the CIS Intergovernmental Agreement on Civil Aviation and Use of Airspace (hereinafter: IAC).  In this regard, Kazakhstan based its civil aircraft certification 
requirements, including airworthiness requirements and certification procedures, on international 
requirements of the CICA and IAC.  In accord ance with international standards of the CICA, 
Kazakhstan developed its Law No. 339-IV "On Use of  Air Space of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
15 July 2012.  Article 16 and Chapter 5 of the Law stipulated the main objectives and 
requirements for certification in the field of civil aircraft.  Certification in the field of civil aircraft 
included confirmation of conformity of aircrafts (cer tification of airworthiness, certification of type 
of civil aircraft, certification of specimen of civil aircraft), aerodromes and aviation services to the 
requirements established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the field of use of 
airspace and aviation activities.  The certificatio n was carried out by the competent authority in the 
field of civil aviation – the Civil Aviation Committee under the Ministry of Investments and 
Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
624.  Civil aircrafts had to be airworthy and were allowed for operation with a valid certificate of 
airworthiness, which ensured compliance with the re quirements approved by the Resolution of the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 859 "On Approval of Requirements of Airworthiness 
of Civil Aircraft of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 26 July 2011.  Certificates of airworthiness of civil 
aircrafts issued by foreign countries were recognised in accordance with the "Rules on Recognition of Certificates of Airworthiness of Civil Aircrafts,  Issued by Foreign States" approved by Order of 
the Acting Minister of Transport and Communicati on of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 112 of 
3 March 2011.  
625.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all technical requirements applied to 
goods on the territory of Kazakhstan, including th ose applied as technical regulations as provided 
for in Law No. 603-II "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004 (as last amended on 3 December 2013) and other national legislation, the relevant CU Agreements and other CU Acts, the EAEU Treaty, the relevant Commission Decisions and other EAEU legal instruments, to the 
extent that they corresponded to the definition of a "technical regulation" under the 
WTO  Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade,  would comply with the principles of the WTO 
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, relating in particular to transparency, predictability, and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 144 - 
 
  avoiding the creation of unnecessary obstacles to trade.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
- (iii) Voluntary National and International Standards 626.  With regard to standards, she said that pursuant to Law "On Technical Regulation", 
standards were applied on a voluntary basis and equa lly, regardless of the origin of the product or 
service.  Whereas the application of a variety of standards (including international, regional and 
national) had been foreseen, the application of international standards would prevail.  
International or foreign countries' standards and regulations were used in drawing up national 
standards, except when such standards were inefficient or inadequate for achieving the desired objectives.  National standards were developed, reviewed and terminated in accordance with the 
National Standard of the Republic of Kazakhstan ST RK 1.2-2008 "Procedure for the Development 
of National (State) Standards and Standards of Organizations" (hereinafter: National Standard ST 
RK 1.2–2008) and the "Rules for Harmonization, Recording, Approval, Amendment, Cancellation 
and Entering into Force of National (State) Standards, Classifiers of Technical and Economic 
Information" approved by Order of the Deputy Mi nister of Industry and New Technologies of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 40 of 23 April 2010.  She added that the Committee on Technical Regulation was the only authorized State body in charge of administering work and issuing 
standards in the field of technical regulation, metrology and certification. 
627.  According to National Standard ST RK 1.2-2008, requirements established in national 
standards had to be based on:  (i) the results of research and development works; (ii) patent research; (iii) provisions of international, regional or national standards and regulations of foreign 
countries; and/or, (iv) other official information on the latest achievements of domestic and 
foreign science, engineering and technology.  Nati onal standards were developed on objects that 
addressed tasks of national importance to prov ide safety of products and related processes 
(works), quality of services, protection of cons umers from deceptive practice and production of 
competitive products.  National standards could be developed by natural and juridical persons of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including technical committees on standardization, in accordance with 
the plans of State standardization approved by th e competent authority in the field of technical 
regulation and plans of the authorities whose co mpetence covered objects of standardization.  
National standards could also be developed off-plan .  In this case, in order to avoid duplication, 
information on development of national standards had to be forwarded to the competent authority 
in the field of technical regulation.   
628.  National standards could be developed at the request of State authorities, producers and 
consumers of products, non-governmental organizations and other interested parties.  
The competent authority concluded a contract on development of the national standard with the 
developer of a national standard.  Information on national standards that were under development had to be published on the official website of the competent authority in the field of technical 
regulation. The developer of a national standard  established a working group which prepared the 
first draft of the national standard.  The draft national standard and explanatory note were published at the official website of the competent authority in the field of technical regulation and sent to interested parties for review and comment s.  The time-frame for review by interested 
parties was 60 calendar days.  The developer prep ared the final draft of the national standard 
taking into account comments and proposals received from interested parties.  The developer approved the draft standard and sent it for appr oval to the competent authority in the field of 
technical regulation.  
- (iv) Disposition of Mandatory Na tional Standards of Kazakhstan 
629.  Some Members requested information on the elimination of WTO-inconsistent mandatory 
national standards.  In particular, these Member s enquired whether there were any explicit plans 
to address such standards.   
630.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Law "On Technical 
Regulation", in cases where a technical regulation for a particular product had not been enacted, 
for the purpose of confirmation of conformity the manufacturers could apply international, regional 
(interstate) or national (State) standards that met the technical regulation objectives.  In such cases, compliance with the standard chosen by the manufacturer was mandatory for that WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 145 - 
 
  manufacturer.  As soon as the relevant technica l regulation was adopted, the chosen standard 
could be applied on a voluntary basis.  Standards that contained conflicting provisions could not be 
used for confirming the conformity with the technical regulation and became void.  
631.  In response to a request from some Members for Kazakhstan to bring its standards and 
technical regulations system into compliance with WTO requirements prior to WTO accession, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that upon accession to the WTO, relevant international standards or relevant parts thereof would be used for development of technical regulations, unless 
they were ineffective or inappropriate means for the fulfillment of legitimate objectives pursued, as 
stipulated in the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
632.  A Member welcomed the commitment and expres sed the view that it should explicitly 
include a commitment to amend or rescind any existing standard, technical regulation or 
conformity assessment procedure that was not compliant with the WTO TBT Agreement.  This Member requested further information on how Kazakhstan intended to implement this 
commitment if all WTO-inconsistent mandatory standards had not been phased-out and whether 
these mandatory standards would become voluntary. 
633.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan, jointly with other 
EAEU member States, was actively working on development of technical regulations which would 
replace WTO-inconsistent mandatory standards.  Thus, standards containing mandatory requirements, which were currently in force, wo uld be replaced by technical regulations of 
the EAEU as part of the EAEU technical regulation  harmonization process, based on the work plan 
and timetable for adoption of priority technical regulations contained in CU Commission Decision 
No. 492 and EEC Council Decision No. 103.  Pendin g their replacement by technical regulations 
of the EAEU, standards containing mandatory requirements were in force only to the extent that 
they ensured:  protection of human life or health ; protection of the environment and of animal and 
plant life or health; provision of national securi ty; prevention of deceptiv e practices; and energy 
efficiency (all of which were set out in Law "On Technical Regulation").  Further, such national 
standards were considered by her Government to be "technical regulations" as that term was 
defined in Annex 1 to the WTO TBT Agreement.  She also added that national standards contradicting the WTO requirements were being reviewed with the purpose to harmonize them with international standards.  To date, the total number of national (State) standards of 
Kazakhstan amounted to 4,627, of which 3,323 were harmonized with international standards.  
Thus, 72% of national standards were harmonized with international standards.  In addition, sub-paragraph 5 of Article 4 of Law "On Technical Regulation" prioritized the use of international 
standards. 
634.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all standards currently in force in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan containing mandatory requirements would be applied in compliance with 
the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade from the date of accession.  In case of their 
inconsistency with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, such standards would be modified in accordance with the procedures set-out in EEC Council Decision No. 48 "Regulation on Development, Adoption, Amendment and Cancellation of Technical 
Regulations of the Customs Union" of 20 June 2012, and the national legislation.  Any concerns of 
interested parties and Members regarding compatibility of such mandatory requirements with the WTO  Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade would be duly and effectively addressed in the 
framework of mechanisms and procedures provided for in the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and in technical regulations of the EAEU.  She added that information about the opportunities offered by these procedures would be made available to interested parties and 
Members, inter alia , through the Enquiry Point on TBT and SP S.  She confirmed that the Republic 
of Kazakhstan would fulfil all requirements of th e WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, 
including those on notifications, as of the date of  accession.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
- (v) Conformity Assessment Procedur es including the Accreditation of 
 Conformity Assessment Bodies 
635.  Accreditation enabled a conformity assessment body included in the Unified Register of 
Accredited Certification Bodies and Testing La boratories of the EAEU (hereinafter: Unified 
Register), to issue documents on conformity asse ssment within the area of its accreditation that WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 146 - 
 
  would be accepted within the territory of Kazakhstan, as well as the rest of the EAEU.  Paragraph 4 
of Annex No. 11 to the EAEU Treaty established the responsibility of the EAEU member States' 
accreditation bodies to: (i) carry out the formatio n and maintenance of the register of accredited 
conformity assessment bodies, register of experts on  accreditation, register of technical experts, 
and the national part of the Unified Register; (ii) provide information from the register of 
accredited conformity assessment bodies, register of  accreditation experts and register of technical 
experts, as well as other information and document s related to accreditation, as provided for by 
the EAEU Treaty, to the integrated information sy stem of the EAEU;  (iii) provide an opportunity 
for representatives of accreditation bodies to carry out mutual comparative assessments in order to achieve equivalence of procedures applied in the member States; (iv) consider and decide on the appeals filed by conformity assessment bodies to revise the decisions taken by the 
accreditation body in respect of these conformity  assessment bodies; and, (v) consider and adopt 
decisions on complaints from natural or juridical persons of the member States on the activities of accreditation bodies, as well as on the activities  of accredited conformity assessment bodies.   
Apart from the Unified Register, the EEC also adopted common forms for the certification and 
declaration of conformity; and the Unified Registry of Certificates of Conformity and Declarations 
of Conformity.  Paragraph 3 of Annex No. 11 to the EAEU Treaty provided for application of 
international standards for the development of accreditation rules. 
636.  Products subject to technical regulations of the EAEU could be released for circulation 
within the EAEU customs territory provided they had undergone all necessary conformity 
assessment procedures established by the relevant  technical regulations of the EAEU.  The EAEU 
member States conducted conformity assessment in accordance with the EAEU technical 
regulations.  Conformity assessment had to be ca rried out in the form of registration, testing, 
expertise and conformity verification.  As set out in paragraph 5 of Annex No. 9 to the EAEU 
Treaty, mandatory assessment (confirmation) of conformity (compliance) of products with 
requirements of technical regulations of the EAEU was confirmed by a declaration of compliance or 
a certificate that was issued by a certification body listed in the Unified Register based on tests 
performed by accredited laboratories and testing centres.  For registration of declaration of 
conformity, the following persons could act as app licants:  a juridical person or a natural person 
registered as an individual entrepreneur in ac cordance with national legislation of the EAEU 
member States or a person acting as a producer/seller or performing the duties of a foreign 
producer on the basis of a contract, concluded with the producer, which stipulated that supplied 
products met the requirements of technical regula tions of the EAEU and established liability for 
non-compliance of supplied products with the requir ements of technical regulations of the EAEU.  
CU Commission Decision No. 621 "On the Regulation on the Application of Model Schemes of 
Conformity Assessment (Confirmation) in the Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" of 7 April 2011 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 621), established common forms and 
regulations on the application of model conformity assessment schemes to ensure compliance with 
the requirements of technical regulations of the EAEU. 
637.  Pursuant to paragraph 5 of Annex No. 9 to the EAEU Treaty, activities related to 
conformity assessment had to be carried out by the accredited certification bodies and testing 
laboratories included into the Unified Register.  The Unified Register was formed and maintained in 
an order adopted by the Commission.  Recognition of results issued by accredited certification bodies and testing laboratories had to be carried out in accordance with Annex No. 11 to the EAEU 
Treaty.  Results of conformity assessment of products for which no technical regulations of the 
EAEU had come into force, were recognized in a ccordance with paragraph 7 of Annex No. 9 to the 
EAEU Treaty. 
638.  For the purpose of conformity assessment, the EAEU member States, in accordance with 
paragraph 4 of Annex No. 9 to the EAEU Treaty, could apply international and regional standards 
and in the absence thereof, national standards.  Application of these standards on a voluntary 
basis ensured the compliance with requirements of technical regulations of the EAEU.  The EEC 
adopted a list of such standards (hereinafter: List of Standards).  The national standards contained 
rules for testing and measurement techniques, including rules for sampling, required for application and implementation of technical regu lation requirements and conducting conformity 
assessment.  Application of international, regional and/or national standards included in the List of 
Standards on a voluntary basis was a sufficient condition to prove compliance with requirements of technical regulations of the EAEU.  However, non-compliance with the standards included in the 
List of Standards did not mean non-compliance with the technical regulations of the EAEU.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 147 - 
 
  639.  Pursuant to paragraph 5 of Article 53 of the EAEU Treaty, the liability for non-compliance 
with requirements of technical regulations, as  well as for violation of conformity assessment 
procedures, was established by legislation of each member State.  Each EAEU member State had the right to take all appropriate measures whenever it ascertained that products did not conform 
to the requirements of technical regulations of the EAEU.  Such measures included actions aimed 
at prohibiting their placement on the market, withdrawing the products from the market in 
accordance with the national legislation of the EAEU member States and informing other member 
States thereof.  Furthermore, the EAEU member States had the right to take emergency measures 
to prevent entry of hazardous products into the EAEU market.  Any EAEU member State seeking to 
apply such measures had to notify the other EAEU member States. 
640.  With respect to conformity assessment, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that at 
the national level Law "On Technical Regulation" provided for (i) "conformity recognition" – a 
procedure that resulted in a documentary certification (in the form of declaration of conformity or conformity certificate) of conformity of an object (product or process) to the requirements 
established in technical regulations or standards; and (ii) "accreditation" – an official recognition 
by an accreditation body of the competence of ju ridical persons to perform conformity recognition 
works.  Conformity recognitions could be mandatory – in the form of certification by an accredited 
conformity assessment body or a producer's declar ation of conformity (for products subject to 
technical regulation requirements); and voluntary – in the form of certification or a conformity declaration of a producer/seller indicating that the requirements of standards, other documents or special requirements were met (for products no t subject to mandatory conformity recognition). 
641.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that Kazakhstan would, from the date of 
accession, ensure that State bodies use existing (or soon-to-be-completed) relevant guides or recommendations, or the relevant parts of them, issued by international standardization bodies as 
a basis for their conformity assessment procedures, ex cept where, as provided for in Article 5.4 of 
the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, such guides or recommendations or relevant parts of them were inappropriate for Kazakhstan.  In addition, she confirmed that in accordance 
with Article 5.1.2 of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, in respect of products 
subject to mandatory certification, the conformity assessment procedure provided for in the EAEU Treaty and other EAEU legal instruments would not be more strict or be applied more strictly than was necessary to give Kazakhstan adequate confidence that products conformed to the applicable 
technical regulations or standards.  She confirmed that the products subject to mandatory 
certification set out in CU Commission Decision No. 620 "On the New Version of the Unified List of Products Subject to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirmation of Compliance) within the 
Framework of the CU with Issuance of Single Documents, approved by CU Commission Decision 
No. 319 of 18 June 2010" of 7 April 2011 would be defined in accordance with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, including the provisions of Article 5.1.2 thereof.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
642.  In response to a Member enquiring how a manufacturer could obtain a certificate, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that according to the procedure for issuing conformity certificates established in the Technical Regulation "Procedures of Conformity Certification" 
adopted by Government Resolution No. 90 of 4 February 2008: 
- the applicant submitted an application for carrying out certification to a conformity 
certification body;  
- the conformity certification body reviewed the application and informed the applicant of its 
decision within three days upon receipt of the application;  
- the decision for carrying out the certification procedures had to contain all basic 
certification conditions based on the established certification procedures for the type of 
product being certified, as well as proposed certification scheme, list of the necessary 
technical documents, list of the parameters, inspection conditions and title of an accredited 
laboratory/centre which carried out the testing; 
- if the applicant agreed to the conditions of the certification procedures, they concluded a 
contract for carrying out the works; 
- tests were carried out on the samples, design, structure and production technology of 
which had to be the same as that of the product supplied to consumers; 
- the conformity assessment body or an accred ited laboratory/centre, upon request of the 
conformity assessment body or a commission consisting of auditors appointed by the 
applicant, carried out sampling.  Quantity of samples, procedure for their selection, as well WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 148 - 
 
  as storage rules, were established in accordance with the regulatory and methodical 
documents on certification and testing methods of a specific product; 
- the applicant had to submit technical documentation for the samples, the structure and 
content of which were established in the normative documents of a specific product as well 
as the technical documents to be submitted in accordance with the basic certification 
conditions, mentioned above; 
- accredited laboratories carried out testing on the samples provided to the conformity 
assessment body; 
- certification tests had to be carried out in accordance with the methods and within the 
terms stipulated in the regulatory documents designed for a specific product but no longer 
than 30 calendar days; and, 
- after analysis of the test results, and other documents on product conformity, the 
conformity assessment body conducted conformity assessment. 
643.  The conformity certificate was issued by the conformity assessment body on the basis of 
an expert's conclusion.  In case of negative test ing results, the conformity assessment body had to 
issue the decision indicating the reasons for refusal. 
644.  The representative of Kazakhstan further described that Government Resolution No. 367 
"On Mandatory Conformity Assessment of Products in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 April 2005 
established two lists of products subject to mandatory conformity assessment in Kazakhstan:  (i) List of Products and Services Subject to Mandatory Certification; and (ii) List of Goods Conformity of which could be Verified by Declaration of Conformity.  To circulate as well as enter 
into Kazakhstan's market, the listed products had to undergo conformity assessment for the 
purposes of mandatory requirements and had to be accompanied with a conformity certificate or a declaration of conformity.  With respect to the re lationship of the two lists with the Unified List 
approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that 
products that passed mandatory conformity assessment in Kazakhstan, would still need to receive conformity certificate or declaration of conformity  in an EAEU member State, when being exported 
to the EAEU member State, if the products were not included in the Unified List approved by CU 
Commission Decision No. 620.  She recalled that the EAEU and national lists were subject to revision upon adoption of a relevant technical regu lation of the EAEU for a product included in the 
above-mentioned lists. 
645.  Referring to a previous statement of Kazakhstan on revisiting and subsequent elimination 
of the list of products subject to mandatory certification upon adoption of related technical r e g u l a t i o n s ,  a  M e m b e r  c o m m e n t e d  t h a t  s o m e  c a t e g o r i e s  o f  p r o d u c t s  w o u l d  a l w a y s  r e q u i r e  
mandatory certification.  Asked to confirm whether Kazakhstan was considering that products like 
pharmaceuticals and medical devices be subject to mandatory conformity certification, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan currently did not foresee to cancel 
mandatory conformity assessment requirements for all products.  In general, a conformity 
assessment scheme for a specific product would be established in a relevant technical regulation of the EAEU. 
646.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that in order to access Kazakhstan's 
market, pharmaceuticals and medical devices were subject to State registration conducted by the 
Ministry of Public Health and Social Development.  Within the EAEU framework, pharmaceuticals were not included in the Unified List approved by  CU Commission Decision No. 526.  Therefore, the 
development of a technical regulation of the EAEU for pharmaceuticals was not planned.  
Medical devices were included in the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526.  In accordance with EEC Council Decision No. 103,  the decision on the development of the EAEU 
Technical Regulation "On Safety of Medical Devices" would be made after the adoption of the 
Agreement on Conducting Uniform Policy in the Field of Registration and Monitoring of Circulation of Medical Devices (Medical Devices and Medical Eq uipment) in the Territory of the Customs Union 
and Single Economic Space (hereinafter: Agreement on Circulation of Medical Devices).  The draft 
Agreement on Circulation of Medical Devices an d the draft Agreement on Cooperation of CU 
member States in the Field of Circulation of Pharmaceuticals were developed in order to regulate the placement of medical devices and pharmaceutic als on the territory of the EAEU.  The draft 
Agreements provided for a phased implementati o n  o f  t h e  u n i f o r m  p o l i c y  i n  t h e  s p h e r e  o f  
registration and monitoring of circulation of medical devices and pharmaceuticals through harmonization in the first phase and the subsequent unification in the second phase of 
requirements for medical devices and pharmaceuticals.  This would provide a basis for mutual WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 149 - 
 
  recognition of the results of work on State regi stration of medical devices and pharmaceuticals 
with the application of uniform permit documents. 
647.  A declaration of conformity could be prepared  on the basis of evidence collected by the 
applicant alone or on the basis of evidence ob tained with the participation of a conformity 
assessment organization.  The declaration of conformity had to be registered by the relevant 
accredited conformity assessment organization and was valid, similarly to a conformity certificate, on the entire territory of Kazakhstan.   
648.  Recognizing the need for keeping track of manufacturer's declarations of conformity, a 
Member expressed concern that instituting an official register / requiring official registration could be disproportionate and unnecessarily trade-restrict ive, especially concerning imports, since it 
would be certainly more burdensome in practice for non-domestic suppliers to apply for this 
registration.  This Member required the manufac turer to keep a full technical file with the 
specifications of the product including the supplier declaration of conformity.  This file had to be made available to public authorities (mainly in the framework of market surveillance) under their 
simple request.  In this regard, this Member requested information on: (i) the formalities to 
accomplish in order to have a supplier declaration of conformity registered; (ii) if any, costs to be 
borne by the manufacturer/importer/legal representati ve; (iii) the length of registration procedure; 
and, (iv) grounds of refusal.  In addition, this  Member enquired whether Kazakhstan considered 
less trade-restrictive modalities to process supplie r's declaration of conformity, such as allowing 
the manufacturer/importer/legal representative to keep a full technical file (including the declaration) at the disposal of the authorities under their simple request.  This Member also 
enquired how Kazakhstan intended to avoid that this provision put foreign manufacturers in a less 
favourable position compared to domestic ones. 
649.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  currently the EAEU legal framework did not 
stipulate uniform procedures in the sphere of decl aration of conformity.  Therefore, requirements 
and procedures related to declaration of conformity  were applied in accordance with the national 
legislation.  Chapter 4 of the Technical Regulation "Conformity Confirmation Procedures", approved 
by  Resolution of the Government of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan No. 90 of 4 February 2008, 
established procedure for declaration by market participants.  The manufacturer (performer) undertook a declaration based on the documents confirming the conformity of products to the specified requirements.  The following documents could be used as a basis for declaration by the 
manufacturer (performer):  (i) protocols of approval and other control testing conducted by the 
manufacturer (performer) and/or accredited testing laboratories; (ii) previously obtained certificates in force, or testing protocols for primary products, materials, components; 
(iii) statement of State control, confirming the product compliance with the requirements of the 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan; (iv) do cuments confirming the conformity of products to 
the specified requirements (deliveries of primary products, production process, assembling, 
finished products, package and marking); and, (v) quality management system certificates.  
In this regard, consideration and registration of  the declaration of conformity by a conformity 
assessment body had to be paid by the manufacturer (performer) on a contractual basis.  Declaration could be undertaken for specific products or a group of homogeneous products in 
relation to which the common requirements were established.  Declaration could be taken for the 
period determined by the manufacturer (performer ) of products based on the planned period of 
production of such products or the sales period of a products lot, but no longer than for one year.  
Declaration accepted by the manufacturer (performer) had to be registered in an accredited 
conformity assessment body.  Within a period not exceeding three days, the conformity assessment body had to consider and check the followin g:  (i) presence of this kind of products in 
the list of the products conformity of which could be verified by the declaration; (ii) eligibility of 
the manufacturer (performer) to undertake the declaration; (iii) completeness and accuracy of the indication of the regulatory standardization documents provided for the confirmation of these products conformity; (iv) presence of all document s provided by the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan for manufacturing of these products; and, (v) accuracy of information filled in the 
declaration.  After review of submitted document s, the conformity assessment body registered the 
declaration in a special section of the registered declarations record.  The registered declaration 
had to be kept by the manufacturer (performer) along with the documents on the basis of which 
the declaration had been filed, within the period no less than three years after its expiry date.  Within the same period, the conformity assessmen t body should keep a co py of the registered 
declaration and supporting documents.  If the requ irements of regulatory documents indicated in 
the declaration had changed or the juridical person had been reorganized, the manufacturer WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 150 - 
 
  (performer) had to issue a new declaration and submit it for registration to the conformity 
assessment body.  With respect to costs involved, she stated that the amount of payments for the works on review and registration of the declaratio ns had to be determined on a contractual basis 
between conformity assessment bodies and manufacturers (performers).  As for the reasons for 
refusal of registration of conformity declaration, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the 
registration could be refused only for the following reasons:  (i) a product's conformity could be verified only in the form of certification; (ii) the presented documents were not sufficient to verify 
the conformity of a product with safety requirements provided for in the relevant technical 
regulation; or, (iii) when the technical regulation  had not been developed, provided for in the 
relevant regulatory legal act.  In conclusion, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the registration requirements equally applied to an d were the same for both domestic and foreign 
suppliers.  Therefore, there was no provision in the legislation that put foreign manufacturers in a 
less favourable position compared to domestic manufacturers.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that the EAEU was in the process of simplify ing the procedure of registration of declarations 
of conformity by introducing electronic registration.  Electronic registration would allow the 
manufacturer to register its declaration of conformi ty in the electronic Unified Register by filling 
out an electronic application form, submitting the declaration of conformity signed with an 
electronic signature, and the relevant evidence. 
650.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, depending on the technical regulation at 
issue, documents establishing compliance with the requirements of the technical regulation could include a supplier's own evidence, such as declaration of conformity with the relevant technical 
regulation, test reports, and other documents as relevant, in accordance with the legislation of 
Kazakhstan, the EAEU Treaty and other EAEU lega l instruments, or the results of conformity 
assessment procedures that Kazakhstan may accept pursuant to Article 6.1 of the 
WTO  Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
651.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the cost of mandatory conformity 
assessment would be paid by an applicant.  Moreover, the cost of mandatory conformity 
assessment was to be determined regardless of the country and/or place of their origin or of the persons acting as applicants.  She confirmed th at the cost incurred by a conformity assessment 
body formed the basis for determining the cost to the applicant.  The elements that would typically 
be considered by a conformity assessment body in the territory of Kazakhstan in determining fees 
included the costs of labour, any necessary materi als or equipment, and tests, as well as other 
usual costs and profits typical to commercial practices in this sphere.  She also noted that the 
provisions of Law No. 603-II "On Technical Regula tion" of 9 November 2004 as a whole reflected 
the principle of uniform application of requirem ents and conformity assessment procedures to 
domestic and imported products.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
652.  Some Members noted that there did not appe ar to be a commitment to ensure that 
regulatory authorities allow a reasonable period of time between the final publication of a conformity assessment procedure and its entry into force so that suppliers could adapt.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that tech nical regulations of the EAEU entered into force 
after a certain transitional period after their official publication (normally around 18 months).  
She clarified that the rules of conformity to a technical regulation normally would be contained within the regulation itself.  It meant that the conformity assessment procedures also entered into 
force after a sufficient transitional period after their official publication. 
653.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that, in cases where a positive assurance 
of conformity with technical regulations was required and technical rules and methods for ensuring 
compliance with technical regulations (i.e., elements of conformity assessment procedures, 
defining the methods of research, tests, measuremen ts, or selection of samples that could be used 
to comply with the technical regulations) were not included in a technical regulation, such rules and methods would be developed in accordance with EEC Collegium Decision No. 306 "Regulation 
on Procedures for Development and Approval of Lists of International and Regional Standards, 
and, in their Absence, National (State) Standards of Customs Union Member States, that Ensure Compliance with Technical Regulations of the Customs Union and Necessary for Conducting 
Conformity Assessment (Confirmation)" of 25 Decemb er 2012.  She confirmed that Decision of the 
Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission No. 48 "Regulation on Development, Adoption, Amendment and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" of 20 June 2012 
provided for their approval by the EEC Collegium no later than six months before the entry into WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 151 - 
 
  force of the relevant technical regulation and th at EEC Collegium Decision No. 306 provided for the 
placement of such rules and methods on the offi cial website of the EEC upon their adoption.  
She added that these rules were to be based on relevant guides or recommendations issued by international standardizing bodies, in accordance with Article 5.4 of the WTO Agreement on 
Technical Barriers to Trade, and would define the methods of research, tests, measurements, or 
selection of samples that may be used to comply with the technical regulations.  The rules must, where possible, list a choice of compliance methods and, in order to ensure compliance with 
Article 5.1.2 and other provisions of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, 
conformity assessment procedures would not be more strict or be applied more strictly than necessary to give adequate confidence that pr oducts conform with the applicable technical 
regulations, taking account of the risks non-conformity would create.  She confirmed that the 
above-mentioned rules would not create a bigger impediment to business activity than was 
necessary to fulfil the goals that were specified in paragraph 1 of Article 52 of the EAEU Treaty.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
654.  Asked specifically about the existence of an appeal process, she said that an applicant 
could appeal decisions on conformity recognitio n to the Board of Appeals of the conformity 
recognition organization concerned, then to th e Board of Appeals of the Committee on Technical 
Regulation; and the decisions of the latter could be  a p p e a l e d  i n  c o u r t .   P u r s u a n t  t o  N a t i o n a l  
Standard ST RK 3.10-2007 "The Order of the Examin ation of Appeals", an appeal had to be filed in 
writing, enclosing all relevant documents, with in one month of the contested decision of the 
accredited certification body.  Each Board had to take a decision within 15 days and the applicant 
was notified in the following 10 days. 
655.  She added that any domestic or foreign organization could act as a conformity certification 
body or a test laboratory as long as it had received accreditation in accordance with legislation of 
Kazakhstan.  Certification bodies or laboratories were not allowed to operate (e.g., issue 
conformity assessments) outside their scope of a ccreditation.  Test results issued by foreign 
authorized bodies could be recognized through accreditation of these foreign bodies in 
Kazakhstan's national accreditation system.  At present, there were no foreign bodies accredited 
as conformity assessment organizations in Kazakhstan.   
656.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that pursuant to Article 33 of Law  
"On Technical Regulation", certificates of conformity of foreign countries, testing results and 
conformity marks were recognized in accordance with international (bilateral or multilateral) 
agreements signed by Kazakhstan.  Recognition procedures were determined by the "Rules of 
Recognition of Certificates of Conformity of Foreign Countries, Test Protocols, Conformity Marks 
and Other Documents Issued in Foreign Systems of  Conformity Assessment" approved by Order of 
the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regu lation and Metrology No. 119 of 22 April 2005.  
Paragraph 5 of the Rules confirmed that foreign conformity certificates, testing protocols, 
conformity marks and other documents had to be recognized if there was an international (either 
bilateral or multilateral) agreement with a co untry issuing the document, i.e., agreement on 
recognition of conformity assessment results.  Sh e added that at the EAEU level, CU Commission 
Decision No. 621 established Scheme No. 9 which addr essed the issue of recognition of certificates 
of conformity issued by third-country conformity assessment bodies.  
657.  Asked whether Kazakhstan considered the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade 
as an international agreement or treaty within the meaning of Article 33 of Law No. 603-II 
"On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004, th e representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
her country considered the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade as an international agreement within the meaning of Article 33 of the Law.  Thus, it was possible under Law No. 603-
II "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2 004 for Kazakhstan to accept the results of 
conformity assessment procedures done in WTO Members on the basis of, and in compliance with, Article 6.1 of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, without requiring the conclusion of a mutual recognition or other agreement.  The acceptance of such results throughout the EAEU 
was established by the Treaty on the Functioning of the Customs Union in the Framework of the 
Multilateral Trading System of 19 May 2011.  Therefor e, from the date of its accession to the WTO, 
Kazakhstan would ensure, whenever possible, that results of conformity assessment procedures of 
conformity assessment bodies located in other WTO Members were accepted, provided that 
Kazakhstan was satisfied, as provided in Article 6.1 of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, that those procedures offered an assurance of conformity with applicable technical 
regulations or standards equivalent to the own procedures of Kazakhstan.  The representative of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 152 - 
 
  Kazakhstan also confirmed that as provided in  Article 6 of the WTO Agreement on Technical 
Barriers to Trade, such acceptance also could, for example, be achieved through the membership of Kazakhstan's national accreditation body in the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) and the International Accreditation Forum (IAF) and signing of the ILAC 
Arrangement, which would build confidence in the adequacy and technical competence of the 
conformity assessment bodies of third countries  accredited by other ILAC and IAF members, 
including acceptance of the results of such conformity assessment bodies, conclusion of a mutual 
recognition agreement and other appropriate mean s.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
658.  Asked to provide information on international conformity assessment bodies which issued 
certificates that were recognized in Kazakhstan, the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
conformity certificates were mutually recognized in accordance with signed international 
agreements.  At present, such mutual recognit ion agreements existed only with CIS countries: 
(i) the Agreement on the Coordinated Policy on Standardization, Metrology and Certification of 
13 March 1992, which had established the Interstate Council for Standardization, Metrology and 
Certification (EASC) to carry out work on harmonizing standardization and conformity assessment legislation; and, (ii) the Agreement on Principles of Mutual Recognition of Certification Activities 
with the CIS Countries of 4 June 1992, in the context of which Kazakhstan had agreed to recognize 
conformity certificates issued by CIS countries and to apply inter-governmental standards (GOST) alongside national standards (ST RK).  Moreover , Kazakhstan planned to sign the Agreement on 
Mutual Recognition of Results of Accreditatio n of Test Laboratories (Centers) Conducting 
Conformity Assessment (Confirmation) Works of the CIS countries.   
659.  In addition, in 2010 the National Center of Accreditation (NCA) had become full member of 
ILAC and had signed the Multilateral Agreement on Recognition of Testing Results (ILAC MRA).  
In continuation of the work in this direction, on 3 February 2011 the NCA had signed an agreement 
with ILAC on the use of ILAC MRA Mark.  The NCA concluded the licence agreements on use of 
ILAC MRA Laboratory Mark, on the basis of which the contracts on the use of a combined MRA 
Laboratory Mark were concluded.  This MRA Mark signified that a laboratory issuing a testing 
report, a certificate of calibration/verification or other documents, was accredited by the NCA, which was signatory of the ILAC MRA.  To date, 62 contracts with laboratories had been concluded.  The NCA was also a full member of the Pacific Accreditation Cooperation (PAC) organization, which 
was a regional organization of the IAF, and a signatory to the PAC Multilateral Agreement on 
Products.  Membership in these organizations provid ed the basis for acceptance of test, inspection 
and calibration data issued by laboratories accr edited by other ILAC and PAC members.  Moreover , 
necessary procedures to join the IAF as a full member and join IAF Multilateral Agreement (MLA) 
had been completed.  The application was sent to the IAF Secretariat in 2012 and it had been considered in October 2013 at the IAF General Assembly, and approved.  In the future, the NCA 
planned to continue its activities on joining multilateral agreements of the above-mentioned 
organizations in other areas. 
660.  Some Members of the Working Party noted the existence of bilateral agreements on 
standards with China and Turkey and asked whethe r the provisions of these bilateral agreements 
would be applied on a MFN basis.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the 
Intergovernmental Agreement on Cooperation with  the People's Republic of China on Quality 
Assurance and Mutual Inspection of Exported an d Imported Products of 5 July 1996 provided for 
information exchange on legislation, conformity recognition and product supervision procedures 
applicable to both sides.  To implement the pr ovisions of this Agreement, the two parties had 
signed a Memorandum on Mutual Understanding on 17 November 2006.  Also a Memorandum of 
Understanding between the Committee of Technical Re gulation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the State Department of Standardization of Chin a had been signed on 1 September 2011 providing 
for development of cooperation in the sphere of standardization on the basis of internationally accepted principles.  Kazakhstan had also concluded intergovernmental bilateral agreements on 
cooperation in the area of standardization, metrology and certification with Armenia, Azerbaijan, 
Bulgaria, Israel, Qatar, Lithuania and Turkmenistan, as well as inter-departmental agreements between the Ministry of Industry and New Techno logies (now the Ministry of Investments and 
Development) and its counterparts in the Czech Republic, Germany, Moldova, Singapore and the 
Slovak Republic.  These bilateral agreements were aimed at removing technical barriers in mutual trade as well as cooperating in the sphere of research and technology by means of mutual 
recognition of standardization, metrology and certification systems, including conformity 
certificates.  She said that Kazakhstan stood read y to negotiate a bilateral agreement on standards WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 153 - 
 
  with any WTO Member.  She confirmed that upon WTO accession, Kazakhstan would provide WTO 
Members with MFN treatment in relation to the application of technical barriers to trade. 
661.  A Member expressed concerns regarding application of Kazakhstan's conformity 
assessment procedure in practice, notably in the case of veterinary drugs, noting that the resulting 
process seriously distorted trade, as it was time-consuming and costly, and as such was 
incompatible with the WTO TBT Agreement.  Some Members sought information on the requirement to receive separate permissions from the chief veterinarian to transport imports of 
veterinary drugs within Kazakhstan, even after obtaining a valid certificate of conformity.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan ex plained that currently veterinary drugs were not 
included into the Unified List approved by CU  Commission Decision No. 526 and, thus, were not 
subject to mandatory conformity assessment.  Veterinary drugs imported to Kazakhstan for the 
first time were subject to registration by the Minist ry of Agriculture.  She also added that in order 
to import veterinary drugs to Kazakhstan, permission from the chief veterinarian was required.  However, permission from the chief veterinarian was not required to transport imported 
pharmaceuticals within the country. 
662.  A Member requested more information on the implementation of the provisions of Law 
"On Technical Regulation", enquiring specifically about the application of mandatory requirements 
in the area of telecommunications within the fr amework of the legislation.  In reply, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the telecommunications sector, like all other sectors, fell within the coverage of Law "On Technical Regulation".  Accordingly, Law No. 567-II "On Communications" of 5 July 2004 had been amende d, in particular Article 7 (stipulating the 
authority of the Government to approve tech nical regulations) and Article 16 (conformity 
assessment in the area of telecommunications).  
(d) Transparency 
663.  With regard to the transparency and publicat ion requirements of the WTO TBT Agreement, 
the representative of Kazakhstan said that, for administrative reasons, the EAEU member States 
established their own national enquiry points  on technical regulations and sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures.  In case of Kazakhstan, the combined Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS 
(Information Centre) had been established by Government Resolution No. 718 "On the Rules on Creation and Functioning of the Enquiry Point on  TBT and SPS" of 11 July 2005 (hereinafter: Rules 
on the Enquiry Point) under Kazakhstan's Institute for Standardization and Certification, which was 
a subordinate body of the Committee on Technical Regulation.  Any interested party could 
approach the Enquiry Point for information.  She also added that units responsible for providing information on SPS measures to the Enquiry Point had been appointed at the Ministry of 
Agriculture and the Ministry of Public Health and Social Development.  According to paragraph 12 
of the Rules on the Enquiry Point, government agencies submitted appropriate information on adoption and application of TBT and SPS measures to the Enquiry Point.  The main functions of the 
Enquiry Point for TBT and SPS were: (i) interaction with the WTO Secretariat, WTO Members and 
international organizations to provide interested parties and foreign States with the following information and documents upon their request: (a) copies of documents and information on adopted or proposed technical regulations, standards, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, 
amendments made to them, (b) conformity assessment procedures, (c) membership or 
participation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in international organizations and international treaties on standardization, SPS measures, conformity asse ssment, bilateral and multilateral accreditation, 
and (d) sources of publications of drafts, technical regulations, SPS measures and standards; and 
(ii) publication of notifications in the Enquiry Point's Journal.  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that to date there were no plans to divide the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS into 
two separate enquiry points.  The Enquiry Point could be contacted at:  
Address: Orynbor st. 11, 
  Astana 010000, 
  Republic of Kazakhstan 
Telephone: +7 (7172) 22 66 63 
Fax:  +7 (7172) 20 64 81 
E-mail:  enquirypoint@mail.ru 
Website:  http://wto.memst.kz/en  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 154 - 
 
  664.  Adopted and draft regulations on TBT and SPS, including technical regulations of the EAEU, 
were regularly published on the websites of the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS, the Committee on Technical Regulation, the Ministry of Public Health and Social Development and the Ministry of Agriculture, local executive bodies and accredited public associations.  These regulations were also 
published in the journal "Bulletin of the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS". 
665.  Draft technical regulations were developed an d examined by working groups, which were 
composed of representatives of State bodies, te chnical committees on standardization and other 
interested parties (including public organizations, scientific unions, businesses and entrepreneurial 
associations).   
666.  In response to a Member's question on notification procedures in the EAEU, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that taking into account that EAEU member States 
acceded to the WTO separately, each of them had separate obligations on notification.  
Thus, Kazakhstan and the EAEU member States that  were also WTO Members, in accordance with 
their commitments, would have to notify all draft technical regulations of the EAEU.  The notified 
drafts would be identical and subject to the same  deadlines for comments.  All comments received 
from third countries would be sent by the EAEU member States to the EEC.  The EEC was responsible for processing all the comments, publishing them on the official website of the EEC and 
forwarding them to the Developer of the draft te chnical regulation (relevant competent authority 
of the EAEU member State).  Thus, the process established within the EAEU ensured that there 
was no duplication in considering the comments received on draft documents. 
667.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, in accordance with EEC Council Decision 
No. 48, the period for public consultations for draft technical regulations had to be no less than 
60 days from the day of the placement of the draft technical regulation on the official website of 
the EEC.  Neither Law "On Technical Regulation" nor the EAEU Treaty and acts on standardization 
or technical regulation defined or limited the number or character of interested persons who could 
submit comments and/or suggestions to drafts of technical regulation.  EEC Council Decision No. 48 explicitly provided for participation of all interested persons in public consultations.  
She also noted that the relevant international agreements and other legal acts did not provide for 
any restrictions on foreign persons to participate in the public consultations of draft technical regulations as interested parties.  In accordan ce with EEC Council Decision No. 48, interested 
persons, including persons from third countries, could submit their proposals and comments on 
draft technical regulations of the EAEU to the EEC.  According to paragraph 9 of EEC Council 
Decision No. 48, all proposals and comments  received from interested parties of the EAEU and 
third countries, had to be published by the EEC on the official website of the EEC upon their 
receipt.  The EEC sent all comments and suggestions to the Developer of the draft technical 
regulation (relevant competent authority of the EAEU member State) upon completion of the public consultations.  The Developer of the draf t technical regulation revised the draft technical 
regulation and related documents taking into account the comments and proposals.  For each 
comment and proposal, the Developer of the draft technical regulation specified information on its acceptance or justification for its rejection.  The EEC ensured subsequent publication of the summary of comments on the draft technical regulation, including decisions on each of them and 
reasons for such decisions, on the official website of the EEC.   
668.  A Member asked how Kazakhstan envisaged coping with its forthcoming obligations 
resulting from the WTO TBT Agreement, for example,  notification of draft technical regulations, 
taking into account ongoing transfer of competen ces in the field of technical regulation to the 
EAEU.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that Kazakhstan was actively involved in all works undertaken at the EAEU level and could fulfil its commitments as a 
WTO Member, including the commitment to forward notification of draft technical regulations of 
the EAEU.  From the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO, the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS would fulfil all obligations on notifications specified by the WTO Agreements on TBT and SPS, including notifications on the proposed technical regulations of the EAEU to the WTO Secretariat 
and would provide WTO Members with copies of proposed technical regulations upon request.  
In response to a Member's request, the representa tive of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan would 
confirm receipt of comments whenever comments we re received from WTO Members on notified 
legislation.  Moreover, in accordance with the Regulation on Development, Adoption, Amendment 
and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union, approved by EEC Council Decision No. 48, during public consultations draft technica l regulations of the EAEU and notifications about 
the commencement and completion of public consultations on draft technical regulation of the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 155 - 
 
  EAEU were published on the official website of the EEC.  The same information was also published 
on the official website and bulletin of the Committee on Technical Regulation as well as the website of the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS of the Republic  of Kazakhstan.  Upon development of the first 
draft of a technical regulation or upon completion  of public consultations, the Developer of the 
draft technical regulation (a designated State body of Kazakhstan) prepared and sent the relevant 
notification to the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
669.  As for standards, these were developed by te chnical committees on standardization, which 
included Government representatives and interested parties including public organizations, 
scientific unions, businesses and entrepreneurial associations.  Comments were taken into account in the process of finalizing draft standards, and th e agreement of all interested parties was sought.  
All interested parties could request copies of dr aft standards, as well as copies of the comments 
received on a draft.  Following review and approv al at the inter-agency committee level, the draft 
would be submitted to the Government for approval.  Once adopted, the standard would be published in the "Code of Normative Acts of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
Government of Kazakhstan", the republican leve l newspaper, the official publication of the 
authorized body ("Technical Regulation Bullet in"), and on the website of the Committee on 
Technical Regulation (http://www.memst.kz/tr/Nati onal%20standards.pdf). A draft plan on the 
development of standards was published in the monthly "Informational Catalog (Register) of 
Standards" (ICS), by the Committee on Technical Regu lation to enable interested parties to submit 
comments on drafts.  Drafts were published in the official publication of the Committee.  In addition, two subordinate State enterprises of the Committee, Kazakhstan's Institute of 
Standardization and Certification, and Kazakhstan's Institute of Metrology issued periodic 
publications ("Gosstandard News", "Metrology" and "Monthly Informational Index of Standards").  Electronic versions of the plans for development of technical regulations and standards were put 
on the website of the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS 
(http://wto.memst.kz/en/information/plans/plans.php).  The EEC website 
(http://www.eurasiancommission.org /en/act/texnreg/Pages/acts .aspx), was the point of 
publication for documents related to the development, adoption, and application of technical 
regulations of the EAEU.   
670.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would ensure that all laws, regulations, an d other measures within the scope of the 
WTO  Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, such as technical regulations, standards, and 
conformity assessment procedures, applied in Kaza khstan complied with the provisions of the WTO 
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  
(a) Legislative Framework 671.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legislative basis for the regulation of the 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) regime in Kazakhstan was established by the following: the 
Treaty of the Eurasian Economic Union of 29 May 2014 (hereinafter: EAEU Treaty); 
CU Commission Decision No. 625 "On Ensuring of Harmonization of Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures with International 
Standards" of 7 April 2011 (as amended by CU Commission Decision No. 722 of 22 June 2011 and 
EEC Collegium Decision No. 11 of 7 March 2012); CU Commission Decision No. 721 "On Application of International Standards, Recommendations and Guidelines" of 22 June 2011; 
EEC Collegium Decision No. 212 "On Regulation on the Uniform Procedure of Carrying out 
Examination of Legal Acts in the Sphere of Implementation of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures" of 6 November 2012, which had replaced CU Commission Decision 
No. 801 of 23 September 2011; CU Commission Decision No. 835 "On Equivalence of Sanitary, 
Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures and Carrying out Risk Assessment" of 18 October 2011 (as amended by EEC Collegium Decision No. 17 of 11 February 2014); EEC Collegium Decision No. 161 
"On Consultative Committee on Technical Regula tion, Application of Sanitary, Veterinary and 
Phytosanitary Measures" of 18 September 2012 (as last amended by EEC Collegium Decision 
No. 141 of 19 August 2014); and, EEC Collegium Decision No. 31 "On Ensuring Transparency in the Process of Adoption of Acts of the Eurasian Economic Commission in the Sphere of Application 
of Sanitary, Quarantine Phytosanitary and Ve terinary-Sanitary Measures" of 5 March 2013 (as 
amended by EEC Collegium Decision No. 161 of 13 August 2013). WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 156 - 
 
  672.  The legal basis for the sanitary policy within the EAEU was provided in Section XI (Articles 
56 and 57) and Annex No. 12 of the EAEU Treaty.  These provisions replaced CU Agreement on 
Sanitary Measures of 11 December 2009 (as amende d by Decision of the Interstate Council of the 
EurAsEC No. 39 of 21 May 2010, CU Commission Decision No. 887 of 9 December 2011), which 
was terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015 .  The legal basis for the 
sanitary policy was also provided in  Decision of the Interstate Co uncil of the EurAsEC No. 83 
"On Entering into Force of Protocols of 21 May 2010  in the Sphere of Implementation of Sanitary, 
Veterinary-Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures" of 19 May 2011 and CU Commission Decision 
No. 299 "On the Application of Sanitary Measures in the Customs Union" of 28 May 2010, as 
amended by CU Commission Decisions No. 341 of  17 August 2010, No. 456 of 18 November 2010, 
No. 571 of 2 March 2011, No. 622 of 7 April 2011,  Nos. 828 and 829 of 18 October 2011, Nos. 888 
and 889 of 9 December 2011; Decisions of the EEC Council Nos. 36 and 37 of 15 June 2012, No. 
64 of 20 July 2012, Nos. 114 and 115 of 17 Decemb er 2012; Decisions of the EEC Collegium Nos. 
32, 33 and 34 of 19 April 2012, No. 89 of 13 June 2012, No. 111 of 12 July 2012, No. 117 of 19 July 2012, No. 141 of 23 August 2012, Nos. 206 and 208 of 6 November 2012,  and No. 6 of 
15 January 2013 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 299).  A consolidated version of CU 
Commission Decision No. 299, as amended, was available at the following EEC webpage: http://www.eurasiancommission.o rg/en/act/texnreg/Pages/acts .aspx, which was regularly 
updated.  
673.  The legal basis for the veterinary policy within the EAEU was provided in Section XI 
(Articles 56 and 58) and Annex No. 12 of the EAEU Treaty.  These provisions replaced the 
CU Agreement on Veterinary-Sanitary Measures of 11 December 2009 (as last amended by the 
EurAsEC Interstate Council Decision No. 39 of 21 May 2010), which was terminated when the 
EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  The legal basis for the veterinary policy was also 
provided in CU Commission Decision No. 317 "On the Application of Veterinary-Sanitary Measures 
in the Customs Union" of 18 June 2010, as amended by CU Commission Decisions No. 342 of 
17 August 2010, No. 455 of 18 November 2010, Nos. 569 and 570 of 2 March 2011, No. 623 of 7 April 2011, No. 724 of 22 June 2011, No. 726 of 15 July 2011, No. 810 of 23 September 2011, 
Nos. 830, 831 and 834 of 18 October 2011, and No. 893 of 9 December 2011; EEC Council 
Decisions No. 85 of 12 October 2012 and No. 95 of 9 October 2014; EEC Collegium Decisions No. 254 of 4 December 2012, No. 274 of 12 December 2012, No. 307 of 25 December 2012, No. 192 of 10 September 2013, No. 244 of 29 October 2013,  No. 294 of 10 December 2013, No. 18 of 
11 February 2014 and No. 178 of 30 September 2014 and EEC Council Decision No. 95 of 
9 October 2014 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decisi on No. 317);  CU Commission Decision No. 607 
"On Common Forms of Veterinary Certificates on Goods Subject to Veterinary Control Imported 
into the Customs Union Territory from Thir d Countries" of 7 April 2011 (as amended by 
CU Commission Decisions No. 832 of 18 October 2011 and No. 892 of 9 December 2011; EEC Collegium Decisions No. 262 of 4 December 2012, No. 308 of 25 December 2012, No. 245 of 
29 October 2013, and No. 19 of 11 February 2014; and EEC Council Decision No. 95 of 
9 October 2014); CU Commission Decision No. 624 "On Regulation on the Procedure of Development and Maintenance of the Register  of Companies and Persons which Carry out 
Production, Processing and/or Storage of Products  Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance) 
Imported into the Territory of the Customs Un ion" of 7 April 2011; CU Commission Decision 
No. 726 "On Veterinary Measures" of 15 July 2011; CU Commission Decision No. 833 "On Equivalence of Systems of Inspection of Ob jects of Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 
18 October 2011; EEC Council Decision No. 33 "On Amendments to the Exemption in Application of 
Veterinary Measures in Respect of the Goods Included in the Common List of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 16 May 2013; and, EEC Council Decision No. 94 of 
9 October 2014 (hereinafter: EEC Council Decision No. 94) which had replaced  CU Commission 
Decision No. 834 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 18 October 2011 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 834).  A consolidated version of CU Commission Decision No. 317, as 
amended, was available at the following EEC webpage:  
http://www.eurasiancommission.org/e n/act/texnreg/Pages/acts.aspx wh ich was regularly updated.  
674.  The legal basis for the phytosanitary policy within the EAEU was provided in Section XI 
(Articles 56 and 59) and Annex No. 12 of the EAEU Treaty.  These provisions replaced  the CU 
Agreement on Plant Quarantine of 11 December 2009 (as last amended by the Decision of the 
Interstate Council of the EurAsEC No. 83 of 19 May 2011), which was terminated when the EAEU 
Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  The legal basis for the phytosanitary policy was also 
provided in CU Commission Decision No. 318 "On Ensurance of Plant Quarantine in the Customs WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 157 - 
 
  Union" of 18 June 2010, as amended by CU Commission Decisions No. 528 of 28 January 2011, 
No. 894 of 9 December 2011; EEC Council Decisions No. 50 of 16 August 2013, No. 25 of 24 April 2014 and No. 93 of 9 October 2014 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 318) and Decision of the Interstate Council of the EurAsE C No. 76 "On the Organization of the Transfer of 
Control from the Russian-Kazakh Border to the External Border of the Customs Union" of 
15 March 2011.  A consolidated version of CU Commission Decision No. 318, as amended, was available at the following EEC webpage: http ://www.eurasiancommission .org/en/act/texnreg/ 
Pages/acts.aspx, which was regularly updated.  
675.  In addition, the following nine EAEU technical regulations had been adopted, which set 
food quality and safety requirements: (i) "On Fo od Safety", adopted by CU Commission Decision 
No. 880  of 9 December 2011 (as amended by EEC Collegium Decisions No. 129 of 11 June 2013, 
No. 147 of 25 June 2013 and No. 91 of 10 June 2014); (ii) "On Labelling of Food Products", 
adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 881 of 9 December 2011; (iii) "On Juice Products Made of Fruits and Vegetables", adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 882  of 9 December 2011; (iv) 
"On Fat-and-Oil Products", adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 883 of 9 December 2011; (v) 
"On Safety of Grain", adopted by CU Commissi on Decision No. 874 of 9 December 2011; (vi) 
"On Safety of Certain Types of Specialized Prod ucts, Including Dietetic Medicinal and Dietetic 
Prophylactic Meals", adopted by EEC Council Decisi on No. 34  of 15 June 2012; (vii) "On Safety of 
Food Additives, Flavourings and Processing Aids " ,  a d o p t e d  b y  E E C  C o u n c i l  D e c i s i o n  N o .  5 8   o f  
20 July 2012; (viii) "On Safety of Milk and Milk Pr oducts", adopted by EEC Council Decision No. 67  
o f  9  O c t o b e r  2 0 1 3 ;  a n d ,  ( i x )  " O n  S a f e t y  o f  M e a t  a n d  M e a t  P r o d u c t s " ,  a d o p t e d  b y  E E C  C o u n c i l  
Decision No. 68 of 9 October 2013.  The list of ad opted EAEU technical regulations was available at 
the following EEC webpage: http://www.eurasiancommissi on.org/en/act/texnreg/ 
deptexreg/tr/Pages/tecnicalreglament.aspx. The section of the Technical Regulation "On Food 
Safety" pertaining to fish and fish products curre ntly was not applied and would become applicable 
upon entry into force of the corresponding sectoral technical regulation.  
676.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that national legislation remained in effect 
to the extent that it did not contradict the EAEU Treaty, CU Commission Decisions and EEC Council 
and Collegium Decisions.  She further explained th at issues not specified by the above-mentioned 
Treaty and Decisions were dealt with by the national legislation, in particular: Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002 (hereinafter: Law "On Veterinary"); Government Resolution 
No. 407 "On Approval of Regulatory Legal Acts in  the Sphere of Veterinary" of 28 April 2003, by 
which the following had been approved: (i) Regulation on the State Veterinary and Sanitary Control, (ii) Rules for Compulsory Seizure and Destruction of Animals, Products and Raw Materials 
of Animal Origin, which Constitute High Danger to Animal and Human Health, or Mandatory 
Decontamination (Disinfection) and Processing Without Withdrawal Thereof, (iii) Rules and Conditions of Compensation to Juridical and Natural Persons of the Value of Removed and 
Destroyed Infected Animals, Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin, which Constitute High 
Danger to Animal and Human Health, (iv) List of Highly Contagious Animal Diseases, when Compulsory Seizure and Destruction of Animals, Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin, which Constitute High Danger to Animal and Human Health are to be Held, (v) List of Highly 
Contagious Animal Diseases, Prevention, Diagnosis and Eradication of which are Implemented at 
the Cost of the Budget, (vi) Rules of State Veterinary and Sanitary Control During Movement of Objects Across the State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan, and, (vii) Rules of Organization of 
Veterinary Control Posts at the State Border and Customs Checkpoints; Government Resolution 
No. 1754 "On Approval of Organization of Slaugh tering of Agricultural Animals Intended for 
Subsequent Sale" of 4 November 2009; Government Resolution No. 2331 "On Approval of the 
Rules on the Identification of Agricultural Animal s" of 31 December 2009; Order of the Minister of 
Agriculture No. 16-04/647 "On Approval of Rule s of Issuance of Permits for Exportation, 
Importation and Transit of Objects with Regard to Evaluation of Epizootic Situation in the Territory" of 9 December 2014 (hereinafter: Order of the Minister of Agriculture No. 16-04/647) which had 
replaced Government Resolution No. 132 "On Approval of Rules of Issuance of Permits for 
Exportation, Importation and Transit of Objects with Regard to Evaluation of Epizootic Situation in the Territory" of 19 January 2012 (hereinafter: Government Resolution No. 132); Government 
Resolution No. 149 "On Approval of the Rules of Transportation (Movement) of Objects on the 
Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 21 January 2012; Government Resolution No. 165 
"On the Approval of the Rules for Entry (Importation) of Food Products Subject to State 
Registration" of 19 February 2008; Law No. 301-III "On Food Safety" of 21 July 2007; Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On Public Health and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009; Government Resolution No. 125 "On Approval of the Rules for Assignment of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 158 - 
 
  Registration Numbers to Entities Producing Food Products" of 11 February 2008; 
Government Resolution No. 2267 "On Approval of the Rules for Refusal for Entry, as well as for Production, Use and Sale of Products Intended for Human Consumption, on the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as for Use in Business and/or Other Activities" of 
30 December 2009; Law No. 344-I "On Plant Quarantine" of 11 February 1999 (hereinafter: Law 
"On Plant Quarantine"), Law No. 331-II "On Plant Protection" of 3 July 2002; Government Resolution No. 1295 "On Approval of the List of Qu arantine Facilities, Alien Species and Extremely 
Dangerous Pests" of 10 December 2002, as last  amended by Government Resolution No. 1351 of 
11 September 2009; Government Resolution No. 1730 "O n Approval of the Rules for Protection of 
the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan from  Plant Quarantine Objects and Alien Species" of 
30 October 2009; Government Resolution No. 1287 "On Approval of the Rules on Withdrawal and 
Destruction of Quarantine Products, Infected  by Quarantine Objects, Not Subject to 
Decontamination or Processing" of 3 November 2011; Government Resolution No. 1674 "On Approval of Phytosanitary Requirements to Imported Quarantine Products" of 
30 December 2011; and Government Resolution No. 1396 "On Approval of the Rules for Procedure 
of Registration and Production Tests and State Registration of Pesticides (Chemical Insecticides) " of 30 November 2011. 
(b) Competent Authorities for the Regulati on of Trade in Agricultural Products 
- (i) EAEU Authorities and Responsibilities 677.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that Eurasian Economic Commission 
(hereinafter: EEC or Commission) became the successor of the CU Commission as of 
January 2012. Within the EAEU institutional framework for regulating in the sphere of SPS 
measures, the role of the Commission was to coordinate the development and implementation of SPS measures by the EAEU member  States, which involved their respective sanitary, veterinary, 
and phytosanitary authorities.  The Commission laid out common general principles and adopted 
common safety requirements for goods marketed wi thin the territory of the EAEU.  These safety 
requirements covered sanitary and epidemiological, veterinary, and phytosanitary regulations that 
governed production and trade of the EAEU. 
678.  The EEC was established as a single permanent regulatory body of the EAEU by Article 18 
of the EAEU Treaty.  The EEC consisted of a Co uncil and a Collegium.  The competences of the 
Council and Collegium were stipulated in Annex No. 1 to the EAEU Treaty and "Regulation of the 
Work of the Eurasian Economic Commission", appr oved by the Decision of  the Supreme Eurasian 
Economic Council No. 1 of 18 November 2011.  The Council had the right to veto the decisions adopted by the Collegium. The Council had the following competences with respect to SPS 
measures: 
- adoption, introduction of amendments and addenda into the Common Lists of Goods 
subject to Sanitary-Epidemiological Surveillance, Veterinary and Quarantine Phytosanitary 
Control; and, 
- adoption and introduction of amendments and addenda into the Regulation of Sanitary and 
Epidemiological Control, Regulation on Common Procedure for Conduct of Veterinary Control, Regulation on Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling 
Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance), and the Regulation on 
Common Procedure for Conduct of Quarantine Phytosanitary Control. 
The Collegium had responsibility for the rest of th e issues, including the adoption and introduction 
of amendments and addenda into the Common Ve terinary Requirements and Common Forms of 
Veterinary Certificates, the Common Sanitary Requirements, and the Common Quarantine Phytosanitary Requirements. 
679.  Developing SPS measures at the EAEU level involved specific technical and administrative 
expertise via working groups, which reported to the Consultative Committee on Technnical Regulation, Application of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures (hereinafter: Consultative Committee).  Functions and interactions of the working groups and the Consultative 
Committee were defined by specific regulations: th e "Regulation of Working and Expert Groups on 
SPS and TBT", approved by the Deci sion of the Minister on Technical Regulation – Member of the 
EEC Collegium of 3 October 2013, and the "Regulat ion on the Consultative Committee on Technical WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 159 - 
 
  Regulation, Application of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures", approved by EEC 
Collegium Decision No. 161 of 18 September 2012.  The current practice for development of draft 
EAEU legal acts on SPS measures was as follows:  
- an EAEU member State or the EEC initiated the development of a draft EAEU legal act;  
- an EAEU member State responsible for developing the draft was appointed, or the EEC 
acted as a developer; 
- a working group, including representative s of the EAEU member States' competent 
authorities was established to review the draft; 
- a draft document that was discussed and approved at a working group meeting, was then 
submitted to the Consultative Committee for publishing on the EAEU official website for public consultations. The EAEU draft SPS texts were published at the following web-page: 
http://www.eurasiancommission.o rg/en/act/texnreg/depsanmer/ publ/Pages/default.aspx. 
The period for public consultation was two months.  The comments were collected by the Department of the Sanitary, Phytosanitary and Veterinary Measures of the EEC; 
- after the process of public consultation, all comments and questions were discussed within 
the working group. In accordance with EEC Collegium Decision No. 31  "On Ensuring 
Transparency in the Process of Adoption of Acts of the Eurasian Economic Commission in 
the Sphere of Application of Sanitary, Quar antine Phytosanitary, and Veterinary and 
Sanitary Measures" of 5 March 2013, as amended by EEC Collegium Decision No. 161 of 13 August 2013, the Department of the Sanitary, Phytosanitary and Veterinary Measures, within 30 working days after expiration of the public consultation period, compiled a 
summary table of comments and answers, based on the discussion that took place in the 
EAEU working group to examine those comme nts, and published the summary table of 
comments and answers on the official EAEU we bsite. This table of comments and answers 
took into account comments received in the framework of WTO SPS notifications of the 
EAEU member States. A final revision of the draft document was discussed and approved by the working group and submitted to the Consultative Committee; 
- the draft document was reviewed at the meetin g of the Consultative Committee. In case 
the draft was approved, it was submitted to the EEC Collegium for approval; and 
- the EEC Collegium either adopted the EAEU documents which were under its competence 
or in other cases approved the drafts before submitting them to the EEC Council for 
adoption. 
In reply to a specific question from a WTO Memb er, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that currently the fixed time-frame – not less than 60 days – was established only for public 
consultations on SPS measures.  The length of the other stages of the process of development and 
approval of SPS legal acts depended on the time  required for reaching a consensus by all EAEU 
member States. 
- (ii) National Authorities 
680.  Kazakhstan's veterinary service consisted of th e Department of Veterinary and Food Safety 
at the Ministry of Agriculture, and the Committee of Veterinary Control and Surveillance under the 
Ministry of Agriculture.  The Department of Veteri nary and Food Safety was in charge of strategic 
planning in the sphere of veterinary safety  and developing rules and regulations in this area.  
The Committee of Veterinary Control and Surveillan ce was in charge of budgeting and conducting 
veterinary control and surveillance of the objects of veterinary and sanitary control and 
surveillance, including on the State border, epizootic  welfare, as well as the veterinary surveillance 
of establishments.  In addition, the veterinary control framework included: (i) veterinary control posts; (ii) the oblast, city and rayon territorial branches of the Committee of Veterinary Control 
and Surveillance; and (iii) subordinated State veterinary organizations (National Reference Center 
for Veterinary, Republican Anti-Epizootic Entity, and Republican Veterinary Laboratory.  Executive 
functions in the sphere of veterinary were transf erred to local executive bodies of the respective 
administrative-territorial units (oblast, city, rayo n, etc.), which included veterinary branches, as 
well as State veterinary organization s to conduct veterinary measures.  
681.  In February 2014, the Committee of Consumer Righ ts Protection of the Ministry of National 
Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter: Committee of Consumer Rights Protection) 
replaced the Committee of State Sanitary and Epidemiological Surveillance of the Ministry of 
Health.  The Committee of Consumer Rights Prot ection was the authorized body responsible for 
issues related to sanitary and epidemiological welfare. Functions of the Committee of Consumer WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 160 - 
 
  Rights Protection were specified by Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On Public 
Health and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009.  The representative of Kazakhstan said 
that the Department of Phytosanitary Safety of the Ministry of Agriculture was in charge of strategic planning in the sphere of phytosanitar y safety and development of rules and regulations 
in this area.  The Committee of State Inspection in  the Agro-Industrial Complex of the Ministry of 
Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan was in charge of budgeting  and conducting phytosanitary 
control including border control, measures on pr otection of plants from pests, monitoring of 
agricultural lands against plant pests and diseases. 
682.  With regard to participation in international organizations in this sphere, she said that as a 
member of the World Organisation for Animal He alth (hereinafter: OIE) since 1993, Kazakhstan 
intended to follow the provisions of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Animal Health Codes and Manuals.  
For the purpose of application of OIE Code, Kazakhstan had ratified the International Agreement 
on Establishment the OIE (Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 109-IV of 24 December 2008).  
In addition, Kazakhstan had ratified the Conven tion for the Establishment of the European and 
Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization, in March 2004, and the International Plant Protection 
Convention (hereinafter: IPPC), in April 2010.  She further explained that Kazakhstan was a member of Codex Alimentarius Commission since 2005.  Hence, the international standards, 
recommendations and guidelines of the OIE, IPPC, and the Codex Alimentarius (hereinafter: 
Codex) would be applied in Kazakhstan. 
(c) Development of Technical Regulati ons/Mandatory Requirements on SPS 
683.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that EAEU member States also elaborated 
mandatory requirements for products within technical regulations.  These could be adopted by the 
EEC, pursuant to:   
- Article 52 and Annex No. 9 of the EAEU Treaty; and, 
- Decision of the EEC Council No. 48 "On the Regulation on Development, Approval, 
Amending and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" of 20 June 2012 (hereinafter: EEC Council Decision No. 48). 
684.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the aim of the ongoing legislative and 
implementation work in the EAEU and Kazakhstan was to ensure harmonization with the standards, guidelines, and recommendations of the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), and the Codex Alimentarius (Codex).  
This work, in her view, would ensure full compliance of the SPS regime of Kazakhstan, whether 
measures were adopted in the context of the EEC or domestically, with the requirements of the 
WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (hereinafter: WTO 
SPS Agreement) from the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO. 
685.  She added that the approaches towards harmonization of the EAEU measures and the 
Kazakh domestic regulation of sanitary and phytosanitary issues with the standards, guidelines, 
and recommendations of these international organizations were defined in the framework of the 
EAEU Treaty, Commission decisions and participation of Kazakhstan in the activities of the relevant international organizations.  She explained that CU Commission Decision No. 721 "On Application of International Standards, Recommendations and Guidelines" of 22 June 2011, provided that: in 
cases in which the Commission or the national authorities had not established mandatory 
requirements in the veterinary, or phytosanitary, or sanitary epidemiological and hygienic sphere, the EAEU member States would apply standards, recommendations and guidelines of the OIE, 
IPPC, and the Codex Alimentarius (Codex) resp ectively.  Similarly, if EAEU veterinary, 
phytosanitary and sanitary-epidemiological and hygi enic mandatory requirements in effect in the 
territory of the EAEU were more stringent than relevant international standards, guidelines and 
recommendations, in the absence of scientific justification of risk to human, animal, or plant life or 
health, relevant international standards, guidelines, and recommendations, or parts thereof, would be applied. 
686.  Some Members asked Kazakhstan to provide details on the EurAsEC and EEC processes for 
elaborating SPS Technical Regulations and whether EurAsEC requirements would supersede or 
replace EEC, EAEU and national requirements.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 161 - 
 
  687.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that draft technical regulations, including those 
related to SPS, were developed in the participating countries using internal procedures before being proposed by the authorised national bodies.  For Kazakhstan, the Ministry of Agriculture or 
the Committee of Consumer Rights Protection, as assigned by the Government of Kazakhstan, 
proposed SPS technical regulations to the desi gnated EEC bodies for harmonization, further 
review, and adoption as provided for in the relevant international agreements or EAEU decisions.  Development of the technical regulations of the EurAsEC had been suspended at the EurAsEC level 
based on EurAsEC Interstate Council Decision No. 575 "On Elimination of Technical Barriers in 
Mutual Trade of EurAsEC Member States on the Basi s of the System of Technical Regulation of the 
Customs Union" of 19 October 2011 (hereinafter: Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 575).  The procedures of the development of te chnical regulations of the EAEU were laid down 
in EEC Council Decision No. 48.  In the EAEU framework, the Consultative Committee fulfilled 
coordination and transparency role in the process of development of EAEU technical regulations.  
In particular, it received draft technical regulations from the authorized bodies of the EAEU 
member States, prepared analysis and recommend ations on draft technical regulations, and 
coordinated the development of draft text and resolved disputes concerning it among the authorities of the EAEU member States.   
688.  The representative of Kazakhstan also expl ained that, under the EAEU, any domestic or 
foreign natural or juridical person or governme ntal or non-governmental body could develop a 
draft technical regulation provided that the development of a technical regulation was included into respective schedule outlining the development of pr iority technical regulations of the EAEU and it 
was approved by the authorized body for such work s.  Third-country interested parties, including 
foreign governments, could provide comments on draft technical regulations proposed by any of the EAEU member States, as established in paragraph 8 of the EEC Council Decision No. 48.   
689.  Responding to a question on how draft technical regulations not based on international 
standards, recommendations or guidelines could be  revised prior to their application, she stated 
that the applicable laws and EAEU acts specified the priority use of international standards, 
recommendations and guidelines, as the basis for technical regulations and that the technical 
regulation developer (relevant EAEU member State' s authorized body or the EEC) was required to 
provide his assessment on how the draft was consistent with international standards in his notification of the draft for public comment.  Th e technical regulation developer was also required 
to identify the standards, recommendations and guidelines, used in developing the draft technical 
regulation.  When Kazakhstan was responsible for de veloping technical regulations, it designated a 
state body responsible for development of the draf t technical regulation (hereinafter: Developer of 
the draft technical regulation).  The Developer of the draft technical regulation prepared the first 
draft of the technical regulation and based on proposals from the competent authorities of the 
EAEU member States, formed an EAEU working group that included experts representing 
government bodies, academia and business/consumers associations and other interested parties.  
The draft technical regulation was discussed at the EAEU working group meetings.  The EAEU 
working group would take into account the requirement to use international standards, recommendations and guidelines, and, if necessary, propose appropriate changes. 
Upon completion of the first draft of the technical regulation, the Developer of the draft technical 
regulation sent the draft, an explanatory note, an d a notification on development of the technical 
regulation to the EEC.  The EEC ensured consideration of the first version of the draft technical 
regulation and related set of documents at the meeting of the Consultative Committee.  Following 
the consideration by the Consultative Committee, the decision on starting date and period of public consultations on the draft technical regulation was made, which was formalized by a Protocol.  
In cases when Consultative Committee decided that further revisions were necessary, the 
Developer of the draft technical regulation with in the period established by the Consultative 
Committee revised the draft technical regulation and the set of related documents.   
690.  The public consultation began when  the EEC placed the draft technical regulation, the 
notification on its development, and an explanatory note on its official website.  This information 
was also published at the official websites of the authorized bodies for technical regulation of the 
EAEU member States.  Interested domestic and foreign juridical and natural persons (including 
those from non-members of the EAEU), includ ing foreign governments, could submit their 
comments and proposals on the draft technical regulations to the EEC. The period for comments was at least 60 days following the publication of  the notification on development of the draft 
technical regulation by the EEC.  Kazakhstan inte nded to notify the SPS-related draft technical 
regulations to the WTO SPS Committee in parallel to the public consultation.  In case of significant changes in the draft technical regulation, there wo uld be a new round of public consultations and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 162 - 
 
  new WTO notification would be sent to the WTO Secretariat.  The EEC processed comments and 
proposals received from interested parties during public consultations and WTO notification procedure and sent them to the Developer of the draft technical regulation.  The Developer of the 
draft technical regulation within 20 working days from the date of receiving comments and 
proposals from the EEC ensured the discussion of the comments and proposals by the working 
group and prepared a summary of comments, which included information on their acceptance or justification for their rejection, and sent it to the EEC.  In accordance with EEC Council Decision 
No. 48, the EEC published on its website the tabl e of comments and answers.  The Developer of 
the draft technical regulation within 30 working days from the date of sending the summary of 
comments to the EEC revised the draft technical regulation and the related documents taking into account comments and proposals received during the public consultations, specifically those 
comments that were based on international standards, guidelines and recommendations.  The EEC 
sent the draft technical regulation and related documents to the member States for their internal approval and published them on the official websit e. Upon completion of the internal approval of 
the draft technical regulation by the member States, the draft technical regulation was sent to the 
Consultative Committee that submitted it to the EEC Collegium for approval.  The draft technical regulation and related documents, and disagreements that could not be solved during the 
negotiations were considered by the EEC Collegiu m.  After the consideration, the EEC Collegium 
submitted the draft technical regulation and re lated documents either to the EEC Council for 
approval, or to the Developer for revision.  The EEC Council adopted the final draft technical regulation at its meeting.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that any amendments to a 
technical regulation were adopted by the same procedure.   
691.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that a schedule outlining the development of 
priority technical regulations of the CU had been  adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 492 of 
8 December 2010, which had been replaced by EEC Council Decision No. 103 of 23 November 
2012, by which the "Schedule of Development of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union for 
2012-2013" had been approved, and EEC Council De cision No. 79 of 1 October 2014, by which the 
"Schedule of Development of Technical Regulati ons of the Customs Union and Introduction of 
Amendments into Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" (hereinafter in this Section: Schedule on Development of CU Technical Re gulations) had been approved.  Under these 
schedules, as of November 2014, SPS technical regu lations governing food safety, labelling of food 
products, grain, juice products, oil-and-fat products had been adopted by CU Commission 
Decisions in December 2011; SPS technical regula tions governing specialized products, including 
dietetic meals and food additives had been adopted by the EEC Council Decision in June and July 
2012, respectively; SPS technical regulations governing milk and milk products, meat and meat 
products had been adopted by the EEC Council Deci sions in October 2013; SPS technical regulation 
governing safety of feed stuffs and feed additives had completed public consultation procedures, 
while technical regulations on safety of fish and fish products, alcoholic beverages and tobacco 
products had completed both public consultation s and internal approval procedures as of May 
2014. Public consultations of the draft Technical Re gulation "On Safety of Bottled Potable Water" 
had been completed in October 2014.  Additionally , the Schedule on Development of CU Technical 
Regulations provided for the development of the following SPS Technical Regulations: On Safety of 
Poultry and its Products and On Safety of Products in Contact with Food, which were currently under development.  
692.  She further explained that a schedule outlin ing the development of EurAsEC priority 
technical regulations had been adopted by Decisi on of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 521 of 
19 November 2010.  Included in this schedule were SPS technical regulations on grain, food 
safety, labelling of food products, tobacco products, juice products, oil-and-fat products, milk and 
milk products, honey and products of bee-farming, and on the safety of bottled water.  However, currently the development of EurAsEC technical regu lations had been suspended by the Decision of 
the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 575 of 19 October 2011.  Members of the Working Party asked 
for clarification as regards the overlap between the EAEU priority technical regulations and the 
EurAsEC priority technical regulations.  The repres entative of Kazakhstan explained that a choice 
had been made to focus on the adoption of EAEU  technical regulations, since the EAEU procedure 
for adoption of technical regulations was faster.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated 
that pursuant to Decision of the Interstate Co uncil of the EurAsEC No. 652 "On Termination of the 
Activity of the Eurasian Economic Community" of  10 October 2014, the activity of the Eurasian 
Economic Community, including the development of technical regulations, had been terminated as 
of 1 January 2015.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 163 - 
 
  693.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the Commission had adopted 35 out of 60 
planned EAEU technical regulations, including th ose related to SPS matters, by November 2014, 
and that all of these technical regulations would enter into force, after a transitional period to allow producers, importers, and exporters to become  aware of and comply with the new technical 
regulations.  A minimum period of six months between the date of publication of a technical 
regulation and the date of its entry into forc e was established in the Decisions adopting the 
technical regulations in order to allow entities to be able to comply with the provisions of a new 
technical regulation or amendments to a technical regulation. Currently, amendments to EEC 
Council Decision No. 48 were being considered in order to envisage this rule in the EAEU legislation, which had been adopted on 28 May 2015.  Notification of when EAEU Technical Regulations entered into force and superseded nati onal technical regulations would be posted on 
the EEC website.  In response to a question  from a Member of the Working Party, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that no new national technical regulations were being developed.  
694.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at the EAEU Treaty, once it entered into 
force, was the international treaty of Kazakhstan, and, with the exception of the Constitution of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan and Constitutional Laws  of Kazakhstan, would prevail, in the event of a 
conflict, over the provisions of laws and other normative legal acts in Kazakhstan (whether 
adopted before or after the EAEU Treaty).  With  regard to Commission Decisions, she explained 
that such decisions had the legal status in the Ka zakh domestic legal system corresponding to that 
which the decision would have had if adopted by the Government or Executive body which had 
been competent to regulate the subject matter at the moment when the Commission was 
delegated the relevant authority.  She explained that Kazakhstan did not repeal a national law when EAEU acts applied, but these were amende d to refer to the EAEU act.  Pending this 
alignment, domestic SPS measures continued to apply in so far as they did not conflict with the 
EAEU act.  
695.  Some Members expressed concern about the overlap between EAEU Technical Regulations 
and other EAEU Decisions in the veterinary and sanitary fields.  For example, Members noted 
overlaps and contradictions between CU Commission Decision No. 299 and CU Technical Regulations, such as the Technical Regulation "On Food Safety".  Members also noted overlaps and contradictions between CU Commission Decision No. 317, in particular, the CU common veterinary 
requirements, and Annex 5 to the Technical Regulation "On Food Safety", which appeared to 
contain veterinary requirements.  Members sought clarity on what requirements were applicable for imported goods.  In addition, those Members identified overlaps between different Technical 
Regulations, i.e. between the Technical Regulation "On Food Safety" and the vertical Technical 
Regulations such as the Technical Regulations for grain, meat, dairy, etc.  A Member noted discrepancies in tetracyclines levels in the technical regulation for meat on the one hand, and in 
CU Commission Decision No. 299 and Technical Regulation "On Food Safety" on the other hand, 
and asked to confirm that the levels indicated in paragraph 43(1) of Annex 5 of the Technical Regulation "On Safety of Meat and Meat Products" were given priority.  They asked if exporters could find all applicable requirements in the vertical Technical Regulations. 
696.  The representative of Kazakhstan with respect to sanitary measures noted that in 
accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 57 of the EAEU Treaty, the Common Sanitary 
Requirements, adopted by CU Commission Decisi on No. 299 and applied to products to which 
technical regulations were to be developed, had to be included into the relevant technical 
regulations. In other words, CU Commission Deci sion No. 299 remained as "reference document", 
codifying all sanitary requirements to products.  However, only the technical regulations, once in 
force, were directly applicable to the controlled goods.  Sanitary requirements contained in EAEU 
technical regulations had to be identical to the requirements of the CU Commission Decision No. 299.  When a sanitary requirement was change d, public consultation of amendments into 
Common Sanitary Requirements and the relevant EAEU technical regulation would be held 
simultaneously.  With regard to veterinary requirements, she further clarified that in accordance 
with paragraph 3 of Annex No. 9 of the EAEU Tr eaty, EAEU technical regulations could contain 
veterinary-sanitary and quarantine phytosanitary requirements only of general nature, for example 
the requirement to accompany a product with a veterinary certificate.  In addition, Kazakhstan had 
raised the issue of duplication and inconsistencies in the technical regulations and EAEU decisions at the EAEU level.  At present, there were two draft amendments to the EAEU Technical Regulation 
"On Food Safety".  The first draft had gone through public consultations in July 2013 and was 
under review for approval by the Consultative  Committee. The second draft had gone through WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 164 - 
 
  public consultations in July 2014 and was under discussion by the working group on sanitary 
measures before review by the Consultative Committee.  Pursuant to the Schedule on Development of CU Technical Regulations, the tw o drafts were planned for adoption prior to 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.  These amendments, among other things, were aimed at 
elimination of discrepancies in the EAEU documents.  
697.  Regarding the discrepancy between horizontal an d vertical technical regulations it should 
be mentioned that with regard to veterinary me asures there were no discrepancies.  Moreover, 
according to paragraph 3 of Article 1 of the EA EU Technical Regulation "On Food Safety", the 
technical regulation shall be applied taking into account the requirements of the EAEU technical regulations that established mandatory requirements for certain types of food products and related requirements to the processes of production (man ufacturing), storage, transportation, marketing 
and utilization, complementing and/or specifying the requirements thereof.  In addition, the 
requirements for certain types of food products and related requirements to the processes of production (manufacturing), storage, transportation, marketing and utilization established in other 
technical regulations of the EAEU could not change  the requirements of the horizontal Technical 
Regulation "On Food Safety".  Horizontal tec hnical regulation of the EAEU "On Food Safety" 
established requirements that were common to all types of food products, in particular: 
(i) general safety requirements (including sanitary and epidemiological, sanitary and 
veterinary) to food products, and to produc tion (manufacturing) processes, storage, 
transportation, marketing and utilization; (ii) general rules of identification of objects of technical regulation; 
(iii) forms and procedures for assessment (confirmation) of conformity of objects of 
technical regulation with the requirements of the technical regulation. 
Vertical technical regulations of the EAEU "On Safety of Meat and Meat Products" and "On Safety 
of Milk and Milk Products" established specific requirement to the relevant products, in particular: 
(i) terminology;  
(ii) specific safety requirements for meat and meat products, milk and milk products, as well 
as the processes of production (manufacturi ng), storage, transportation, marketing and 
utilization, which complement requirements of the Technical Regulation "On Food Safety"; (iii) specific rules for identification of meat and meat products, milk and milk products; (iv) specific requirements for labelling of meat and milk products; 
(v) conformity assessment schemes. 
698.  Some Members expressed concern about the overlap of EAEU and national SPS measures 
and the continued adoption of SPS measures at th e national level in the EAEU member States.  
These Members noted that these amendments were not necessarily with a view to harmonize 
national requirements with EAEU requirements.  In their view, this resulted in uncertainty 
regarding application and compliance with SPS measures and placed a significant burden on trade, 
possibly in violation of the WTO SPS Agreement.  Moreover, continued development and 
application of domestic measures in each of the EAEU member States could result in a lack of harmonization of requirements and increased burden  on trade within the territory of the EAEU.  
These Members requested information from Kazakh stan regarding precisely which SPS measures 
would apply in Kazakhstan and throughout the territory of the EAEU.  These Members also 
requested information on when domestic authorities would cease developing and applying domestic SPS measures.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that national SPS measures, 
when in conflict with EAEU SPS acts, would not a pply to the extent of the conflict. She specified 
that as regards matters covered by EAEU acts, Kazakhstan had ceased adopting amendments of national SPS measures, for purposes other than alignment of national measures with EAEU acts, 
since 1 January 2012.  Until that date, a transitional period allowed the adoption of national 
measures when preparatory technical work had started before 1 July 2010.  These national measures were applicable only in so far as they did not contradict EAEU ac ts.  Some Members asked if alignment of national measures with EAEU acts had to occur within a specified time 
period, and if so, what period applied.  In response, she explained that there was no specified time 
period for such alignment. 
699.  Some Members asked Kazakhstan to describe the exact delineation of competences 
between the EAEU/EEC and the national authoritie s. The representative of Kazakhstan responded 
that the EEC had responsibility for establishing spec ific product requirements, except in the area of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 165 - 
 
  phytosanitary requirements.  This meant that for veterinary and sanitary control, the Commission 
(EEC, as of January 2012), had established a list of goods that could be subject to veterinary control (surveillance), and a common list of goods subject to sanitary surveillance (control).  There was one unified process for control of movement of these products between the EAEU 
member States, i.e., within the territory of the EAEU, and control at the external EAEU border.  
The EEC had also established inter alia unified procedures for inspection of facilities for inclusion in 
the register of authorised facilities (by EEC Council Decision No. 94 of 9 October 2014 which had 
replaced CU Commission Decision No. 834).  Furthermore, guidelines for conducting inspections of 
establishments, which clarified the requirements applicable to these facilities superseded relevant domestic normative legal acts.  With regard to phytosanitary measures, the Commission established the list of products subject to phytosanitary control and developed a draft unified list of 
quarantine organisms which was under discussion between the EAEU member States after public 
consultation procedure.  The EAEU member States also were in the process of developing of EAEU common phytosanitary requirements for regulated products.  Thus, the competence for 
phytosanitary requirements would be transferred fr om national authorities to the EEC Collegium.  
However, until the common list of quarantine organisms and phytosanitary requirements were adopted, competence remained with the national authorities of each EAEU member State at the 
national level.  
700.  With regard to other issues, where the national bodies retained authority to regulate, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that nation al bodies established requirements in respect of 
processes for manufacturing products domestically and penalties in the respective administrative 
code for violation of SPS requirements.  National authorities also developed strategies for 
managing animal diseases; adopted temporary SPS measures, i.e., emergency measures, in the cases of receipt of justified information about danger of imported goods; established sanitary 
requirements for organization of work activity of companies in the sphere of food catering 
services; aligned national sanitary-epidemiological and hygiene requirements with EAEU requirements; and agreed on sanitary-safety zones (i.e., norms related to water safety and 
applicable only domestically).  With regard to phytosanitary issues, national authorities were 
responsible for surveillance and eradication of qu arantine organisms, domestic quarantine zones 
and internal phytosanitary posts. 
701.  She further explained that this division of  competence between the EEC and national 
authorities could evolve with the harmonization of requirements at the EAEU level and how the 
EAEU member States addressed these issues.  Competence would be delegated to the EAEU as part of this process.  The representative of Kazakhstan referred, as an example, to EAEU member 
States' intention to harmonize quarantine and phytosanitary measures of the EAEU member 
States.  Thus, competence would be transferred from national authorities to the EAEU bodies as harmonization of requirements at the EAEU level occurred. 
702.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at the process of harmonization of national 
laws with EAEU acts on SPS matters was taking place at the same time and in a parallel process to the adoption of Commission/EEC decisions on SPS ma tters.  She clarified that only sanitary safety 
limits set at the EAEU level could be applied on th e territory of the EAEU member States.  That is, 
the EAEU member States could not adopt specific MRLs or other sanitary requirements at the 
national level in the absence of those at the EAEU level.  She further clarified that at the national level, Kazakhstan had introduced amendments into the national legislation in order to align them 
with the EAEU legal framework.  In particul ar, Law "On Veterinary" had been amended on 
30 June 2010 (the amendments entered into force on 1 July 2011) and 12 January 2012 in order to remove veterinary control on the border with EAEU member States and retain such control only 
on the state border concurring within the EAEU customs territory and to abolish registration of 
feed stuff, except for feed additives, respectively .  The Order of the Minister of Agriculture No. 16-
04/647 of 9 December 2014, which had replaced Government Resolution No. 132 , governing 
issuance of import permits had also been developed in compliance with the provisions of the EAEU 
Common Veterinary Requirements.  Law "On Plant Quarantine" had been amended in July 2012 in 
order to remove the requirement of import permits. 
703.  Some Members noted that several documents called GOST or MUK appeared to contain 
SPS requirements; however, these documents did not appear to be legal requirements.  
These Members asked Kazakhstan to confirm that those documents could only be considered as guidelines and could not be used to impose restrictive measures on trade if the requirements 
set-out in these documents were not met.  In particular, these Members asked Kazakhstan to WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 166 - 
 
  confirm that there were no legal requirements that set a compulsory frequency of self-checks or  
official checks at the level of the producing establishments for residues or microbiological levels in food. 
704.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that GOST were non-binding 
recommendations.  She stated that compliance with MUKs were internal guidelines and compliance 
with these guidelines was mandatory only for State control bodies and those bodies within Kazakhstan conducting State sanitary-epidemiological control and other types of State control.  
She noted that GOST and MUK documents were being updated on a regular basis taking into 
account current amendments in legislation and the technical base (capabilities for testing).  She confirmed that there were no binding requir ements on how often the producing establishment 
had to test for residues or microbiological levels in its product or how often official checks for 
residues and microbiological checks should be carried out.  She noted that an inspector could ask 
for documents regarding such testing for informational purposes to establish that there was a plan of control of these issues.  Some Members expr essed concerns that an establishment could be 
considered as non-compliant on the basis of a non-binding guideline and asked whether 
Kazakhstan would implement the Codex Guidelin es "For the Design and Implementation of 
National Regulatory Food Safety Assurance Prog ramme Associated with the Use of Veterinary 
Drugs in Food Producing Animals" CAC/GL/71-2009 , which recognized the monitoring done at a 
national level, and by a food producing establ ishment.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that it would implement these Codex Guid elines as of the date of its accession to the 
WTO.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
705.  Some Members also noted that the technical regulations and secondary normative acts 
containing limitative standards did not take into account the corresponding standards, recommendations and guidelines of internationa l organizations or the methodology recommended 
by such organizations to set such standards.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that these technical regulations and secondary normative acts related to sanitary and veterinary issues would be based on the corresponding standards, recommendations and guidelines of 
international organizations. 
(d) Trade in Goods Subject to Veterinary Control 706.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, as noted above, the Commission had issued 
several decisions which provided the legal framework for protection of animal and human health.  
CU Commission Decision No. 317 "On the Application of Veterinary-Sanitary Measures in the 
Customs Union" of 18 June 2010 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 317), as last amended 
by EEC Council Decision No. 95 of 9 October 20 14, established the legal basis for veterinary 
measures in the EAEU and entered into force on 1 July 2010.  CU Commission Decision No. 317 
established a list of goods that could be subject to veterinary control, and adopted provisions on: (i) the common procedure for carrying out of veteri nary inspection at the customs border of the 
EAEU and in the customs territory of the EAEU; ( ii) the common procedure for carrying out of joint 
inspections of facilities and sampling of goods (products) subject to veterinary control (surveillance)  which had been replaced by CU Commiss ion Decision No. 834 of 18 October 2011; 
(iii) the common veterinary (veterinary and sanitary) requirements for goods subject to veterinary 
control (surveillance); (iv) the common forms of ve terinary certificates (for movement within the 
EAEU); and (v) the common List of goods subject to veterinary control (surveillance).  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that EEC Council Decision No. 94 "On Regulation on 
Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to 
Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 9 October 2014 (hereinafter: EEC Council Decision No. 94) had approved a new procedure for conduct of inspections, including specific inspection guidelines, 
and repealed the previous regulation on inspections adopted by the CU Commission Decision 
No. 834 of 18 October 2011.  The Common Sanitary-E pidemiological and Hygiene Requirements to 
Goods Subject to Sanitary-Epidemiological Control (Surveillance) as contained in CU Commission Decision No. 299 "On the Application of Sanitary Measures in the Customs Union" of 28 May 2010, 
as last amended by EEC Collegium Decision No. 6 of 15 January 2013 (hereinafter: 
CU Commission Decision No. 299), established maximum residue levels for controlled goods. 
707.  The representative of Kazakhstan further clarif ied that as stated in the Article "General 
Provisions" of the EAEU Common Veterinary Requirements , the goods subject to veterinary control 
imported to the customs territory of the Custom s Union were subject to regulatory measures 
indicated in the Annex to these Requirements. As  for goods moving from the territory of one WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 167 - 
 
  EAEU member State to the territory of another EAEU  member State, in accordance with the Article 
"General Provisions" they: (i) had to be accompanied by a veterinary certificate of a EAEU common form issued by the competent authority of the exporting EAEU member State; (ii) had to be 
sourced from the establishments included into th e Register of Establishments and Persons that 
Produce, Process and/or Store Goods Moving from the Territory of one EAEU member State to the 
Territory of another EAEU member State; and (iii ) did not require permits issued by the competent 
authorities of the EAEU member States.  
708.  The following basic national regulatory legal acts constituted the legal framework to 
protect human and animal life and health:  Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary" of 20 July 2002 (as last amended on 29 September 2014), Law No. 301-III "On Food Safety" of 27 July 2007 (as last amended on 29 September 2014), as well as subordinate legal acts in the sphere of veterinary, 
which had been approved for the purpose of implementation of these Laws:  Government 
Resolution No. 407 of 28 April 2003, by which the following had been approved: (i) Regulation on the State Veterinary and Sanitary Control and Surveillance; (ii) Rules for Compulsory Seizure and 
Destruction of Animals, Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin, which Constitute High 
Danger to Animal and Human Health, or Mandatory Decontamination (Disinfection) and Processing Without Withdrawal Thereof; (iii) Rules and Cond itions of Compensation to Legal and Natural 
Persons of the Value of Removed and Destroyed Infected Animals, Products and Raw Materials of 
Animal Origin, which Constitute High Danger to Animal and Human Health; (iv) List of Highly Contagious Animal Diseases, when Compulsory Seizure and Destruction of Animals, Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin, which Constitute High Danger to Animal and Human Health are to 
be Held; (v) List of Highly Contagious Animal Diseases, Prevention, Diagnosis and Eradication of 
which are Implemented at the Cost of the Budget ; (vi) Rules of State Veterinary and Sanitary 
Control During Movement of Objects Across the State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and 
(vii) Rules of Organization of Veterinary Control Posts at the State Border and Customs 
Checkpoints; Government Resolution No. 1754 "On A pproval of Organization of Slaughtering of 
Agricultural Animals Intended for Subsequent Sale" of 4 November 2009; Government Resolution 
No. 2331 "On Approval of the Rules on the Iden tification of Agricultural Animals" of 
31 December 2009; Government Resolution No. 132 "On Approval of Rules of Issuance of Permits for Exportation, Importation and Transit of Objects with Regard to Evaluation of Epizootic Situation in the Territory" of 19 January 2012; Government Resolution No. 149 "On Approval of Rules of 
Transportation (Movement) of Objects on the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
21 January 2012; Government Resolution No. 1230 "On Approval of Rules for Issuing Veterinary Documents for Objects Subject to Veterinary-Sanitary Control and Surveillance" of 
22 September 2012. 
- (i) Veterinary Certificates 709.  Members requested information on EAEU requirements related to the development and 
implementation of veterinary certificates.  Members sought to ensure that such certificates would 
be consistent with international standards, recommendations, and guidelines.  Members also requested information on the continued validity of current bilateral certificates agreed with Kazakhstan.  In their view, these bilateral certificates should remain valid until a replacement was 
agreed with the EAEU member States. 
710.  With respect to veterinary certificates, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
42 EAEU common forms of veterinary certificates for import into the EAEU territory from any third 
country had been adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 607 "On Common Forms of Veterinary 
Certificates on Regulated Goods Imported into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan  and the Russian Federation from Third Countries" 
of 7 April 2011, for each of the categories of good s subject to veterinary control as established in 
CU Commission Decision No. 317.  These certificates were subsequently updated pursuant to CU Commission Decisions No. 832 of 18 October 2011 and No. 892 of 9 December 2011, EEC Collegium Decisions No. 262 of 4 December 2012, No. 308 of 25 December 2012, No. 193 of 
10 September 2013, No. 245 of 29 October 2013 and No. 19 of 11 February 2014.  She confirmed 
that in accordance with CU Commission De cision No. 726 "On Veterinary Measures" of 
15 July 2011 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 726), veterinary certificates between 
exporting countries and Kazakhstan finalized prior to 1 July 2010 would be valid for import into the 
territory of the EAEU at least until 1 January 2013. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 168 - 
 
  711.  Furthermore, CU Commission Decision No. 726 "On Veterinary Measures" of 15 July 2011 
provided that the competent authorities of the EA EU member States could negotiate and agree to 
veterinary certificates with requirements that differed from the EAEU common form and specific EAEU Common Veterinary Requirements, if an exporting country made a substantiated request 
prior to 1 January 2013 to negotiate such veterinary export certificate.  The decision also provided 
that bilateral veterinary export certificates, in case an authorized body of an EAEU member State received request to negotiate a veterinary certificate before 1 January 2013, initialled by one of 
the EAEU member States before 1 July 2010, as well as any subsequent amendments to such 
certificates agreed with the authorized body of such EAEU member State, would remain valid for exports from the relevant country into the customs territory of the EAEU until an export certificate was agreed with an EAEU member State based on the agreed positions of the other EAEU member 
States.  Bilateral veterinary export certificates initialled by one of the EAEU member States 
between 1 July 2010 and 1 December 2010 would remain valid for import and circulation of relevant goods, only in the territory of the EAEU member State that initialled the certificate, in 
case an authorized body of exporting country subm itted its request to an authorized body of an 
EAEU member State before 1 January 2013 until a bilateral veterinary export certificate was agreed with an EAEU member St ate based on the agreed positions of the other EAEU member 
States.  While a bilateral veterinary export certificate could contain requirements that differed from 
the EAEU Common Form and Common Requirements, such certificates had to ensure the appropriate level of protection as determined by the EAEU member States.  These new certificates were also required to include terms, including provisions on the relevant product, that were no less 
favourable than those in an international treaty that was concluded prior to 1 July 2010 between 
an EAEU member State and the third country.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
712.  In response to a specific question of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that, in addition, at the request of a Member, Kazakhstan would negotiate and mutually agree on bilateral veterinary certificates with a third country for the goods subject to veterinary 
control imported into the territory of Kazakhstan until EAEU veterinary certificates with the third 
country for such goods entered into force.  The ci rculation within the EAEU of such goods imported 
into the territory of Kazakhstan on the basis of such bilateral certificates agreed by Kazakhstan may be limited to the territory of Kazakhstan.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
713.  Asked to provide more information on the use of veterinary certificates, she said that the 
EAEU legal framework allowed for negotiating veterinary certificates differing from 42 EAEU common forms of veterinary certificates and specific EAEU Common Requirements with a 
competent body of exporting country. If a third country sought to export to an EAEU member 
State a commodity for which veterinary certification was required according to the EAEU Common List of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control an d the EAEU Common Veterinary Requirements, but 
for which no EAEU common form of certificate and no EAEU common requirements existed, a 
bilateral certificate with the interested country could be developed based on a coordinated position of the EAEU member States, and such a bilate ral certificate would be based on relevant 
international standards, guidelines and recommendations as provided for in CU Commission 
Decision No. 721 "On Application of International Standards, Recommendations and  Guidelines" of 
22 June 2011. If, according to the EAEU Common Li st of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control and 
EAEU Common Veterinary Requirements, no veteri nary certification was required for a commodity, 
or if the commodity was not included in the said EAEU Common List, Kazakhstan would not require 
a veterinary certificate.  The representative of Kazakhstan also added that the EAEU member State 
that received a request from a third country to initiate the negotiation on veterinary certificates, or 
the EEC, if the third country had sent its request to it, was responsible for coordinating the 
certificate negotiations and EAEU member States' negotiating positions, as well as preparation and provision of feedback on third countries' proposal s and requests regarding veterinary certificates. 
714.  A Member requested information on the latest amendments to the common veterinary 
requirements, noting that certain provisions of  these requirements did not appear to be in 
accordance with OIE recommendations.  This Member asked whether the intent of these 
amendments was to align these requirements with the OIE. 
715.  Some Members expressed concern that the Commission had adopted 40 common forms of 
veterinary certificates and 38 chapters of common veterinary requirements that did not conform to international standards, recommendations and guidelines, in particular OIE standards, 
recommendations and requirements.  These Members also raised concerns that contrary to the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 169 - 
 
  requirements of the WTO SPS Agreement, intere sted parties, including Members had not been 
accorded an opportunity to provide comments on these measures before they were adopted.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that paragraph 16 of the Regulation on Consultative 
Committee on Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary 
Measures, approved by the EEC Collegium Deci sion No. 161 of 18 September 2012, which had 
replaced the "Regulation on Coordination Committee on Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures",  approved by CU Commission Decision No. 319 
of 18 June 2010 , as last amended by EEC Collegium Decision No. 77 of 9 April 2013, now provided 
an EAEU process for receiving comments from the public on proposed SPS measures.  She further 
clarified that paragraphs 2-4 of CU Commission Decision No. 625  "On Ensuring of Harmonization of 
Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Application of Sanitary, Veterinary and 
Phytosanitary  Measures with International Standards" of 7 April 2011 (hereinafter: 
CU Commission Decision No. 625) that provided a process for reviewing measures for their conformity with international standards and amendi ng those measures that were found not to be 
in conformity with international standards remained applicable. 
716.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that amendments of the common veterinary 
requirements and to the common forms of certificates were being prepared in parallel so as to 
ensure compatibility with international standards, recommendations and guidelines in particular 
OIE standards.  She confirmed that the amendmen ts to the common veterinary requirements and 
to the common forms of certificates would enter into force simultaneously no later than the date of the accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
717.  Some Members noted that Kazakhstan had drafted proposed amendments to a few of the 
EAEU Common Veterinary Requirements.  These Me mbers expressed concerns that these proposed 
amendments were extremely limited, failed to take into account Members' comments, were not 
based on scientific principles, could result in arbi trary or unjustifiable discrimination, and, most 
importantly, failed to bring the EAEU Common Ve terinary Requirements into conformity with 
international standards, recommendations and guidelines, e.g., by requiring conditions for animal 
diseases which were not listed in the OIE Code or  by requiring freedom of the territory of origin 
when less trade restrictive conditions for trade were provided in the OIE Code for the concerned commodity.  Members noted Kazakhstan's commitments in paragraph 716 regarding the EAEU common veterinary requirements and common forms and expressed concerns that Kazakhstan had 
not adopted all of the necessary amendments to achieve compatibility with international 
standards, guidelines and recommendations, in particular OIE standards, by the date of the accession of the first EAEU member State to th e WTO or that these amendments would not enter 
into force as provided in paragraph 716.  These Members urged Kazakhstan to engage in serious 
efforts, including through consultations with WTO Members, with a view to ensure the timely implementation of the commitments in paragraph 716. 
718.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that harmonization of the EAEU Common 
Veterinary Requirements was carried out in 2012 as part of Russia's accession to the WTO. In particular, the timeframes of the absence of an imal diseases by type of controlled goods were 
reduced taking into account the regionalization principle. As part of the harmonization process, 
amendments were introduced to more than 20 chapters of the EAEU Common Veterinary 
Requirements as a result of consultations with so me of the WTO Members.  In addition, with the 
aim of further harmonization with OIE recommendat ions, amendments were introduced to some of 
the chapters of the Common Veterinary Requiremen ts.  The representative of Kazakhstan further 
explained that harmonization of the EAEU veterinary requirements was an ongoing process.  She asserted that the requirements for animal diseases established in the EAEU Common 
Veterinary Requirements were consistent with the OIE recommendations.  She noted that in 
accordance with Article 5.1.1 of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (hereinafter: OIE Code), there were different options (recommendations) fo r imports of goods depending on the status of 
animal health in the country.  Moreover, the OIE Code offered various options because of 
differences between countries in their animal health situations.  As provided in the OIE Code: "The 
animal health situation in the exporting country, in the transit country/countries and in the importing country should be considered before  determining the requirements for trade.  
To maximise harmonisation of the sanitary aspects of international trade, Veterinary Authorities of 
Member Countries should base their import requirements on the standards of the OIE."  She stated that EAEU member States had chosen one of the op tions provided by the OIE Code with regard to 
certain diseases taking into account level of protection that EAEU countries deemed to be 
appropriate.  The representative of Kazakhstan further clarified that the CU Commission Decision WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 170 - 
 
  No. 726 "On Veterinary Measures" of 15 July 2011 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 726) 
allowed for negotiating bilateral veterinary ce rtificates between the EAEU and the exporting 
countries that could contain requirements different from the Common Veterinary Requirements in order to reflect the different animal health status in the exporting countries with the aim to 
promote trade. 
719.  Some Members noted that they had begun to negotiate specific certificates with the 
EAEU member States consistent with CU Commission Decision No. 726.  Members stated that the 
EAEU member States continued to request attestations that went beyond the OIE 
recommendations without providing scientific justification and that the EAEU member States seemed reluctant to negotiate attestations that differed from the EAEU common requirements.  Members also noted that the process for negotiating the certificates was time intensive and that it 
was difficult to ensure that the representatives from Kazakhstan participated in negotiations and 
there was consistency in the positions taken by the EAEU member States participating in each negotiating session. Furthermore, these Members requested information on the basis for an EAEU 
member State, which did not participate in negotiations of specific certificates, to oppose the 
conclusion and adoption of the certificates when the certificate contained provisions aligned with the international standards.  Members noted ongo ing concerns with the lack of efficiency in 
negotiating specific certificates.  The representative  of Kazakhstan replied that during negotiations 
the EAEU member States would propose attestations that followed OIE recommendations except when justified by risk assessment as provided fo r by the WTO SPS Agreement.  The representative 
noted that Kazakhstan participated in negotiations as time and resources permitted, and had 
recently participated in negotiations and initialled a number of bilateral veterinary certificates.  
720.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, if an exporting Member believed that the 
SPS requirements of the EAEU or Kazakhstan resulted  in a higher level of protection than would be 
achieved by measures based on the relevant international standards, guidelines or 
recommendations, Kazakhstan was prepared to consult with the exporting Member on such SPS requirements and, if necessary, would, as a re sult of such consultations, modify requirements 
included in the relevant certificate to bring them into compliance with international standards, 
guidelines, or recommendations consistent with the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
721.  A Member of the Working Party expressed concern that bovine spongiform encephalopathy 
(BSE) requirements set-out in existing bilateral certificates as well as in the EAEU common 
veterinary certificate for live cattle, did not conform to OIE standards, since they respectively foresaw testing of animals for BSE and required th e absence of a genetic link with animals affected 
b y  B S E .   T h e  r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  c l a r i f i e d  t h a t  i n  r e s p e c t  t o  B S E ,  a s  o f  t h e  d a t e  o f  
accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO, bilateral certificates as well as the EAEU common certificates would, as provided for in the WTO Agreement, be in conformity with OIE standards.  The Working 
Party took note of this commitment. 
722.  Some Members stated that a veterinary certificate should not require certification of 
p r o v i s i o n s  t h a t  w e r e  n o t  m a n d a t o r y  r e q u i r e m e n t s  u n d e r  E A E U  a c t s  o r  i n  t h e  a b s e n c e  o f  EAEU mandatory requirements, under international standards, recommendations, and guidelines, 
e.g., to certify for a disease which was not the ob ject of an EAEU act or was not subject to the 
same level of surveillance within the EAEU or Kazakhstan's territory as required in the certificate.  If Kazakhstan or the EAEU sought to have stricter animal health requirements than those set-out 
in the OIE, Kazakhstan or the EAEU must demons trate that, based on risk assessment, as well as 
active and passive surveillance in Kazakhstan or the EAEU territory for animal diseases that could be present on the territory of Kazakhstan or the EAEU, the animal health status of Kazakhstan or 
the EAEU for the disease concerned was such that it justified such stricter requirements. 
The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that veterinary certificates would not include provisions for diseases that were not transmitte d by/relevant to the concerned product, and would 
not require certification of provisions that were not justified based on mandatory requirements 
applicable and surveillance carried out within the territory of Kazakhstan or the whole EAEU.  
The Working Party took note of this commitment.  
723.  Some Members expressed concern as regards the overlap of measures required by 
Kazakhstan to confirm the conformity of goods wi th EAEU and national food safety measures:  
through veterinary export certificates, declarations of conformity, certificates of conformity, listing of establishments authorized to export to the EAEU, import permits, and State Registration.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 171 - 
 
  These Members questioned the utility of such repe ated, multiple and overlapping requirements to 
verify conformity with requirements.  In their view, it was burdensome, unnecessary and trade restrictive to maintain together a declaration of conformity or other forms of conformity assessment and export certificate or additional requirements. Members requested that Kazakhstan 
eliminate this redundancy.   
724.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the Committee of Veterinary Control and 
Supervision exercised authority in relation to ve terinary and sanitary issues when goods were 
imported into Kazakhstan so as to avoid duplication of efforts.  She noted that veterinary 
certificates included both veterinary and sanitary requirements and that only one 
veterinary-sanitary document was required to cross the border.  She further explained that State Registration of controlled goods applied both to domestically produced and imported goods and 
applied only to a limited number of products.  Wi th regard to goods for which the EAEU currently 
required both a veterinary certificate and a declaration of conformity, she confirmed that the EAEU member States, pursuant to EAEU technical regulations, currently under development, would 
require only one document, as specified in each technical regulation, to confirm the conformity of 
products with EAEU requirements.  For example, Te chnical Regulation "On Milk and Milk Products", 
adopted by EEC Council Decision No. 67 of 9 Oc tober 2013, and Technical Regulation "On Meat 
and Meat Products", adopted by EEC Council Decisi on No. 68 of 9 October 2013 provided that only 
veterinary certificates would be required for non-processed and processed milk and meat products. The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
725.  Several Members requested that Kazakhstan confirm that the EAEU member States 
accepted replacement veterinary certificates in accordance with the OIE Code, Article 5.2.3, point 
9), and asked which legal basis provided for this.  
726.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  Kazakhstan had initiated amendments to CU 
Commission Decision No. 317 in order to include provision on acceptance of replacement 
veterinary certificates in accordance with the OIE Code, Article 5.2.3, point 9).  These amendments were adopted by EEC Council Decision No. 95 "On Introduction of 
Amendments into Regulation on Common Procedure for Carrying Out Veterinary Control at the 
Customs Border of the Customs Union and Customs Territory of the Customs Union" of 9 October 2014. 
- (ii) Establishment Approval , Register and Inspections  
727.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that according to CU Commission Decision 
No. 317, many of the goods included in the list of  goods subject to veterinary control were subject 
to three requirements: (i) the exporting establis hment had to be included in the Register of 
Entities and Persons Producing, Processing and/or  Storing of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control 
Imported into the Customs Territory of the Cust oms Union (hereinafter: the Register); (ii) the 
good had to be accompanied by a veterinary certificate; and (iii) an import permit had to be issued 
for importation of goods from an establishment in the Register.  However, the representative 
noted that pursuant to CU Commission Decision No. 830 of 18 October 2011, as amended by EEC Collegium Decision No. 294 "On Introduction of Amendments to Certain Decisions of the Customs Union Commission" of 10 December 2013 (hereinafter: EEC Collegium Decision No. 294), the 
EAEU had agreed to remove certain veterinary co ntrol measures for specific goods in order to 
minimize the overlapping of control mechanisms.  In addition, CU Commission Decision No. 831 of 
18 October 2011 had removed some goods from veterinary control completely. 
728.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasised that according to EEC Collegium Decision 
No. 294, producers of certain imported goods were  exempted from the registry requirements, for 
instance, such as producers of live animals, exce pt for live fish for direct consumption as food, 
feed grain, natural honey, oil-seed flour for f eed, animal fat and oil, unprocessed grain straw, 
extracts and juices from meat, pasta stuffed with fish and invertebrates and processed meat.  The Register was published on the web-page indicated in paragraph 739.  
729.  A Member requested the scientific basis for maintaining some specific products in the list 
of goods subject to veterinary control. Specifically, the Member requested information on the 
inclusion of products of plant origin.  In addition, the Member requested information on the requirement for including the names of establishments exporting processed dairy products in the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 172 - 
 
  Register when destined to Kazakhstan.  This Member requested that Kazakhstan eliminate any 
requirements that did not have a scientific justification and a risk assessment. 
730.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan excluded products of plant origin 
from the list of goods subject to veterinary control in accordance with EEC Council Decision No. 33 
"On Introduction of Amendments to Decision  of the Customs Union Commission No. 810 of 
23 September 2011" of 16 May 2013 (hereinafter: EEC Council Decision No. 33), which would become effective on the date of Kazakhstan's access ion to the WTO.  In addition, as of the date of 
accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO, pursuant to the EEC Collegium Decision No. 294, inclusion to 
the Register of establishments exporting low ri sk products, including processed dairy products, 
intestine and gelatin to Kazakhstan was not required.  She further noted that in accordance with the Common Veterinary Requirements, for several products of animal origin with low risk, an 
import permit and veterinary certificate was required to indicate the name and/or number of the 
establishment assigned by the official veterinary authority of the exporting country.  This requirement was consistent the OIE Code. 
731.  In response to a request from a Member for further information on the requirements and 
procedures for an establishment to be included in the list of establishments authorized to export a 
product to Kazakhstan and the EAEU, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, prior to 
1 July 2010, Kazakhstan did not maintain a regist ry requirement for establishments of exporting 
countries.  The representative of Kazakhstan explai ned that, as of 1 July 2010, imports of some of 
the products subject to veterinary control, as established in CU Commission Decision No. 317, were required to come from establishments approv ed by the EAEU member States and included in 
the Register.  
732.  In response to some concerns of Members related to the maintained requirement to 
provide lists for live animals and certain products' establishments whereas the EAEU framework 
had eliminated this form of veterinary controls, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
the EEC Collegium Decision No. 294 amended the CU  Commission Decision No. 317 to specify, for 
each type of good included in the list of goods subject to veterinary control, which veterinary 
measures (import permits, veterinary certificates and/or listing of establishments) applied to that 
particular good.  In some cases, the form of veterinary control had been modified or eliminated. For example, for some products the requirement fo r veterinary certificates and/or import permits 
had been eliminated.  Similarly, the requirement fo r an establishment to be included in a Register 
had been eliminated or amended to require only the provision of the name and/or number of the 
final establishment dealing with the goods prior to export to the territory of the EAEU, which was included in the import permit and/or veterinary certificate. Trade would then be possible for these 
commodities without listing upon favourable audit results. 
733.  Some Members expressed concerns at the significant trade barriers imposed by this 
interpretation of CU Commission Decisions No. 830 and No. 834, whereby the EAEU member 
States attempted to maintain the requirement for establishment lists arbitrarily for some products 
in contradiction with the provisions in CU Commission Decision No. 830.  Specifically, some Members were concerned that in the implementation of these decisions the EAEU member States were requesting a successful audit as a precondition for removing the listing requirement for 
certain products as established in CU Commission Decision No. 830 and EEC Collegium Decision 
No. 294.  Further these Members were highly concer ned by the refusal of EAEU member States to 
add any new establishments to the list of establishments approved to export to the EAEU. 
734.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that according to paragraph 6 of EEC Council 
Decision No. 94, an audit of foreign official control systems was the basic principle used by the EAEU member States to ensure safety of products subject to veterinary control.  In her view, audit 
of foreign official systems of control was based on international standards and was in line with 
international practice.  She noted that many developed countries applied audit (approval of exporting countries) as the main condition for importing products of animal origin to their territories.  She further explained that products of animal origin from countries that had not been 
audited could also be imported to the EAEU based on  inclusion into the Register.  If the results of 
audit were unfavourable or audit was not conducted, listing of establishments from third countries, when required, would still be possible with the use of the other two options: (i) joint inspection of 
establishments by the EAEU member States; and (ii) guarantees from competent authorities of 
third countries.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 173 - 
 
  735.  Some Members expressed concerns that an EAEU member State had informed its trading 
partners, including WTO Members, that   products, for which listing of establishments was not 
required in accordance with EEC Collegium Decision No. 294, could be imported to the EAEU only 
after favourable audit results.  Taking into account that audit was a complex and lengthy process, 
in order not to stop trade in these products, the EAEU member States had agreed to apply provisional scheme that would be applied until all EAEU trade partners undergo audit.  Under these 
scheme products, for which listing was not required  under EEC Collegium Decision No. 294, before 
audit was carried out, could be imported to th e EAEU based on the listing of establishments. 
Listing of establishments could be done based on the guarantee of third countries' competent 
authorities or joint inspections.  The listing of establishments for such products would be carried 
out until audit was completed and the official system of a respective third country was recognised 
as equivalent.  These Members sought assurances from Kazakhstan that no such scheme was in 
effect in Kazakhstan. 
736.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in implementation of CU Commission 
Decision No. 317 "On the Application of Veterinary -Sanitary Measures in the Customs Union" of 
18 June 2010, as amended by the Decision of th e Collegium of the EEC No. 294 "On Introduction 
of Amendments into Certain Decisions of the Customs Union Commission" of 10 December 2013, 
Kazakhstan would not require an establishment to be included in the Register as set out in Annex 
19 of this Report for importation into the territory of Kazakhstan.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that in implementation of CU Commission Decision No. 317 "On the 
Application of Veterinary-Sanitary Measures in the Customs Union" of 18 June 2010, as amended 
by the Decision of the Collegium of the EEC No. 294 "On Introduction of Amendments into Certain 
Decisions of the Customs Union Commission" of 10 December 2013, Kazakhstan would not require 
a successful audit as a pre-condition for importation into the territory of Kazakhstan of goods listed 
in Annex 19 of this Report.  The circulation within the EAEU of such goods imported into the 
territory of Kazakhstan listed in Annex 19 of this Report may be limited to the territory of 
Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that these measures would be 
implemented prior to accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.  
737.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that pursuant to EEC Council Decision No. 33, 
products of plant origin were excluded from the Li st of Goods subject to Veterinary Control, and, 
pursuant to EEC Collegium Decision No. 317, as amended by the EEC Collegium Decision No. 294 of 10 December 2013, the requirement of inclus ion of third country producers exporting dairy 
products to Kazakhstan into the Register was re placed by the requirement to indicate the number 
and name of the producer in the import permit and veterinary certificate. 
738.  With regard to the list of goods as set-out in Annex 20 of this Report, the representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that categories of goods would be added to the list of goods subject to 
veterinary control or the form of veterinary control applied to categories of goods on the list would be modified only if such action was in compliance with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on 
the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Me asures.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment. 
739.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that since 1 July 2010 and before 
completing work on creating a common web-interface of the Commission's website, the three 
national parts of the Register of establishments from which imports were authorized were valid for 
imports into the entire EAEU territory (unless specified otherwise for specific establishments on the lists). Currently the references to these lists of establishments were available in the following 
website: http://www.eurasian commission.org/en/act/texnreg/ depsanmer/vetsanmeri/Pages/ 
Reestrorg.aspx. Kazakhstan's national part of th e Register could be found at the following web-
link: http://mgov.kz/napravleniya-razvitiya/information-for-third-countries under section 
"Veterinary and Sanitary Measures of the Customs Union" . The addition of an establishment from 
any country to the national part of the Register  could only occur after all three EAEU member 
States agreed on the inclusion of the establishment.   As a result of this decision, products from 
such an establishment could freely circulate within  the territory of the EAEU, unless specifically 
provided otherwise in this decision.  The repres entative of Kazakhstan explained that the EAEU 
member States intended to develop a common web-interface of the EAEU Register of establishments and a common information system so as to have a unique list of establishments that would consolidate their national lists, but exact timing for the development of this database 
could not be specified. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 174 - 
 
  740.  Members noted that Kazakhstan had never maintained a listing requirement prior to the 
establishment of the EAEU and that many of th ese requirements were not based on scientific 
evidence or proportionate to the risk and would represent an unjustified burden on trade and, 
were in their view, inconsistent with the WTO SPS Agreement.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that, in her view, the listin g requirement itself could not be a burden on 
trade.  The burden on trade could result from the application of the wrong mechanism for including an establishment on the Register, for example, if the required actions that had to be done by the 
competent authority of an exporting country an d/or establishment were not based on a risk 
analysis or were more trade restrictive than necessary.  EEC Council Decision No. 94, allowed the use of different mechanisms for listing establishments that provided the possibility of minimizing the application of a more burdensome process than necessary for including an enterprise on the 
list by basing actions on the results of a risk analysis.  The representative of Kazakhstan also 
explained that the requirement to  be in the Register approved to export particular controlled 
products was a means to ensure compliance with EAEU veterinary requirements. 
741.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
in accordance with a transitional period provided under CU Commission Decision No. 317, trade could continue from establishments not on a "list" in the Register - when there was no requirement 
for such a "list" prior to 1 July 2010.  Such trade co uld take place on the basis of an import permit.  
She further explained that according to point 11.3 of the Regulation on Common Procedure for 
Carrying Out Veterinary Control at the Customs Border of the Customs Union and Customs Territory of the Customs Union (hereinafter: Regula tion on Veterinary Control), approved by the 
CU Commission Decision No. 317 (as amended by CU Commission Decisions No. 342 and No. 724, 
and EEC Council Decision No. 95), a transitional  period for listing establishments had been 
established, for the following products: animals; genetic material; apicultural products; raw 
material of animal origin (skins, fur, feather, etc.); feed additives of animal origin; feed of plant 
origin, gelatin and composite products etc., to permit trade to continue until common or unified lists were established. In reply to the request for clarification on the transitional period and the 
question on the deadline for the transitional period for new establishments, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said the transitional period was provided for continuation of trade with third countries on these goods until inclusion of the establishments  producing such goods in the Register.  The CU 
Commission Decision No. 830, as amended by EEC Collegium Decision No. 294, removed the 
registry requirements for certain products, including live animals, except for live fish for direct 
consumption as food; genetic material; apicultural products; raw material of animal origin (skins, fur, feather, etc.); feed additives of animal origin; feed of plant origin, composite products which 
were referenced in paragraph 11.3 of the Regulation on  Veterinary Control.  Therefore, the 
transitional period for these products had lapsed as of 22 August 2012, i.e. the date of entry into force of CU Commission Decision No. 830.  For gelatin, the transitional period provided in 
paragraph 11.3 of the Regulation on Veterinary Control was still applicable, pending the entry into 
force of Table No. 2 of the EEC Collegium Decision No. 294 of 10 December 2013. 
742.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that since 1 July 2010, in case listing 
of establishment was part of the applicable ve terinary requirements, establishments could be 
added to the list of establishments authorized to  export to the EAEU (the Register) following the 
system audit, or following an on-site joint inspec tion conducted by the three EAEU member States 
or the delivery of guarantees as regards conformi ty with the EAEU requirements by the exporting 
country, if the three EAEU member States commonly agreed to rely on such guarantees. 
She explained that if a third country had never expo rted products of animal origin to any of the 
EAEU member States before, and wanted to export to the EAEU for the first time, exporting 
establishments proposed by this third country would have to be inspected by the EAEU member 
States before being added to the Register, in order to confirm the reliability of the veterinary control system of this country. 
743.   The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that EEC Council Decision No. 94 
had replaced CU Commission Decision No. 834 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint 
Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 18 October 2011 and notably clar ified procedures for accepting guarantees from 
competent authorities of third countries, described in paragraphs 46-59 of EEC Council Decision 
No. 94. In particular, EEC Council Decision No. 94 clarified that the competent authority of a third country could send its request to accept its guarantee on compliance of the goods subject to 
veterinary control produced by specific establishment (establishments), including the information 
in accordance with paragraph 46 of EEC Council Decision No. 94 that the competent authority of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 175 - 
 
  the third country considered to be necessary to assess the request and its list of establishments, to 
the authorized body of any EAEU member State.  The authorized body of the EAEU member State 
that received the request was responsible for coordinating the process of consideration of the request for providing the guarantee and for agreeing its decision with the authorised bodies of the 
other EAEU member States.  The authorized body of the member State that received the request 
evaluated the request based on the criteria pr ovided in paragraph 48 of EEC Council Decision 
No. 94 within reasonable time period, but no longer than two months unless additional information 
was requested, which could extend the term of revi ew by 15 working days from the date of receipt 
of the additional information.  Upon favourable  evaluation, the authorized body of the EAEU 
member State prepared the decision within 10 working days and sent it to the authorized bodies of other EAEU member States for approval.  The time-frame for the approval by the EAEU member 
States was 10 working days after receipt.  In the absence of the written reply during the 
established time-frame, the decision was deemed to be approved.  In case of disagreement with the decision, the EAEU member States had to send their reply indicating the reasons for not 
approving the decision to the EAEU member State that received the request within the established 
time-frame.  In case the decision was approved by the EAEU member States, the authorized body 
of the member State that received the request prep ared the final decision within 10 working days.  
The authorized body of the member State that received the request sent written notification to the 
competent authority of the third country on accept ing the guarantee.  In addition, the authorized 
body included the establishments into the Regist er within 10 working days from the date of the 
final decision on accepting the guarantee.  In case of a negative decision on accepting the 
guarantee, the authorized body of the member Stat e that received the request sent notification to 
the competent authority of the third country indicating the reasons for refusal.  The reasons for refusal had to be based on the criteria included  in paragraph 48 of EEC Council Decision No. 94 
and had to explicitly specify which element was not met in those criteria.  Such decision could be 
revised after submission by the competent authority of the third country of additional information. 
The competent authority of the third country whos e guarantee had been accepted in a prescribed 
manner could further send to the authorized body of an EAEU member State a request on 
amending the Register, including the inclusion of new establishment(s).  The authorized body of 
the member State evaluated the provided list of establishments within 10 working days.  Upon favourable decision, the authorized body of  the member State included the establishment(s) 
into the Register within 10 working days and published them on the website.  In case of refusal to 
include the establishment(s) into the Register th e authorized body of the member State notified 
the competent authority of the third country indicating the reasons for refusal. 
744.  Some Members asked on which basis EAEU member States could decide to rely on the 
guarantees of the exporting country for the inclusion into the Register.  Another Member sought clarification as to the processes available to expo rting countries to have facilities added to the 
Register.  In this Member's view, it was unclear whether all options were available to all Members.  
A Member expressed concern that, in practice, the listing of new establishments was no longer accepted on the basis of written guarantees of th e exporting country since the entry into force of 
the EAEU.  In this Member's view, Kazakhstan and the other EAEU member States did not have 
the resources to carry out inspections for any new establishment requesting to be listed by an 
exporting party and some establishments, even alre ady exporting, could not be listed due to this 
lack of resources.  In this Member's view, this  represented an unjustified barrier to trade.   
745.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the authorized bodies of the 
EAEU member States had to have confidence th at the competent authorities of the exporting 
country would effectively ensure that exporting establishments in that country met 
EAEU requirements.  She added that more detailed criteria on foreign guarantees were included in 
EEC Council Decision No. 94. EEC Council Decision No. 94 authorized and provided criteria for accepting guarantees from the competent authoritie s of third countries on the compliance of goods 
produced by an establishment located on its territory.  These criteria were the following: 
- Level of development of the competent authority of the third country; 
- Compliance to the guarantees earlier provid ed by the competent authority of the third 
country; 
- Risk of entry into and spread of pathogens of infectious animal diseases in the third country, 
including those common to humans and animals; 
- Epizootic situation in the third country; 
- Results of monitoring tests of goods subject to veterinary control imported into the 
EAEU territory from the third country, conduc ted by EAEU member States (if available); WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 176 - 
 
  - Data from monitoring of relevant goods done by the competent authority of the third 
country (if available). Absence of such data could not be a reason for refusal of accepting of the guarantee; 
- Confirmation of the fact that the competent authority of the third country checked 
(inspected) the establishment requested for inclusion into the Register and acknowledged 
them as compliant to the requirements of the EAEU as provided for in Annex 3 of the EEC 
Council Decision No. 94; 
- Results of inspections by the competent authority of an EAEU member State or member 
States of establishments located on the te rritory of the third country (if available); 
- Experience of trade with the third country (if available); and, 
- List of establishments requested for inclusion into  the Register with indi cation of the types of 
products. 
746.  Regarding the availability of the three options (audit, guarantees, inspection) for all third 
countries for adding establishments into the Re gister, when required, the representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that pursuant to paragraph 162 of the EEC Council Decision No. 94 
establishments of third countries could be included to the Register based on the results of: 
- successful completion of audit procedures of official system of surveillance, conducted by 
the request of the competent authorities of third countries; 
- a positive decision on granting the righ t to provide the guarantee by the competent 
authority of the third country; 
 - a positive decision of the authorized body of the EAEU member State based on results of 
joint inspection. 
In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that all three options for adding 
establishments of the third countries into the Register were equally available for third countries. 
747.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would provide three 
possibilities for exporting countries' establishments to become eligible to export to the territory of Kazakhstan, as contained in EEC Council Decision No. 94 "On Regulation on Common System of 
Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control 
(Surveillance)" of 9 October 2014, and added to the Register where required pursuant to Annex 20 of this Report including through a system audit, or a joint inspection or alternatively, based on guarantees of competent authorities of third co untries.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment.  
748.  Some Members expressed continuing concerns  that EAEU member States could require 
inspection of each facility as a precondition for accepting guarantees for inclusion in the Register, 
even in the case where Kazakhstan or another EAEU member State had previously accepted 
guarantees from a Member's competent authority.  In these Members' view, requiring inspections was contrary to the concept of accepting guarantees, which were based on confidence in the third 
country's competent authority.  Members requeste d Kazakhstan to eliminate the requirement for 
inspection of a facility as a precondition for acce ptance of a Member's guarantee for that facility.  
Besides, when requested, the inspection was often declined or would not be carried out in a reasonable time-frame. 
749.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that according to EEC Council Decision No. 94, 
there was no requirement to inspect each facility  as a precondition for accepting guarantees for 
inclusion in the Register.  At the same time, pursuant to paragraphs 58 and sub-paragraph 2 of 
p a r a g r a p h  6 0  o f  E E C  C o u n c i l  D e c i s i o n  N o .  9 4 ,  f o r  the purposes of verification of the accepted 
guarantees, EAEU member States could subsequently inspect establishments, included into the Register under guarantees, by the method of random selection.   
750.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that EEC Council Decision No. 94 had allowed 
for joint inspections by the three EAEU member St ates of establishments in third countries that 
sought to be permitted to export goods to the EA EU that are subject to veterinary control in the 
EAEU.  Inspections must be carried out on the basi s of a request by the competent authority of the 
exporting country.  She further explained that it was possible that the representatives of the other 
EAEU member States could delegate their authority to another EAEU member State to carry out an inspection. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 177 - 
 
  751.  Some Members expressed concern about the pr ocess of approving an establishment by 
each of the EAEU member States as set-out in CU Commission Decision No. 834.  For example, 
one member of the EAEU could approve the addition  of an establishment to the Registry, but the 
establishment would not be added to the Registry due to a lack of response from the other EAEU 
member States, hence resulting in excessive delays for obtaining a final inclusion in the Register.  
Further these Members expressed concern that a pproval, to be added to the Register, was by 
consensus and rejection was subjective and did not appear to be based on any criteria.  
These Members requested information on what would constitute a valid reason for refusal to be 
added to the Register, by EAEU member States and for other (non-auditing) EAEU member States to refuse to list an establishment or any time-fra mes for such a decision.  In some Members' view, 
these decisions could be arbitrary and discriminate against Members where the same conditions 
prevailed.  The requirement for consensus between the three member States on the different steps 
of the process was creating significant delays and in many cases making it impossible to add any new establishments to the Register, therefore denying market access to those establishments in 
compliance with the EAEU requirements as defined in CU Commission Decision No. 834 that met 
the conditions to export.  Meanwhile, an EAEU member State individually could decide to suspend exports from establishments present on the Regist er.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied 
that the Members' concern regarding lack of re sponse from EAEU member States was addressed 
by implementation of EEC Council Decision No. 94, which contained detailed steps of review by 
EAEU member States of the request for acceptance of guarantees as stated in paragraph 743 of this Report. In particular, the absence of reply from the authorized body of the EAEU member 
State within the specified time-frame meant consent to the proposed decision.  In addition, in 
accordance with paragraphs 51 and 55 of EEC Council Decision No. 94, if a negative decision on the acceptance of guarantees of the competent au thorities of the third countries had been made, 
the reasons for refusal had to be based on the criteria listed in paragraph 48 of the EEC Council 
Decision No. 94, and had to reflect the specific element that had not matched these criteria, taking into account the principle of proportionality of risk.  
752.  Members of the Working Party also expressed concerns that the implementation of CU 
Commission Decision No. 834 was not in line with Codex Guidelines for the design, operation, assessment and accreditation of food import and export inspection and certification systems (CAC/GL 26-1997), which recommended that:  assessm ent activities by the importing country in 
the exporting country "should concentrate primarily on evaluating the effectiveness of the official 
inspection and certification systems rather than on specific commodities or establishments in order to determine the ability of the exporting country's  competent authority(s) to have and maintain 
control and deliver the required assurances to the importing country".  Members requested that 
Kazakhstan conform to international standards, guidelines and recommendations.   
753.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, at the request of the 
competent authorities of the third country, the EAEU member States would conduct a system audit 
to determine if the official system of supervision of that third country was capable of providing a level of protection at least equivalent to that provided by EAEU requirements.  If this audit of the official system of supervision was successful, the EAEU member States would include 
establishments of the audited country on the Regist er in accordance with a list of establishments 
that the competent authority of the third country provided to the EAEU member States.  If an 
audit of a third country's official system of supervision was not carried out or was not completed or 
if, as a result of such audit, the third country's o fficial system of supervision was not recognized as 
being capable to provide a level of protection at least equivalent to that provided by the EAEU requirements, the EAEU member States could agree to include establishments of that country to 
the Register on the basis of joint inspections or guarantees provided by the competent authority of 
the third country if listing was required for such products. If listing of establishments for a type of product as set out in Annex 19 to this Report was not required  in accordance with CU Commission 
Decision No. 317 "On the Application of Veterinary -Sanitary Measures in the Customs Union" of 18 
June 2010, as amended by EEC Collegium Decision  No. 294 "On Introduction of Amendments into 
Certain Decisions of the Customs Union Commission" of 10 December 2013, the absence of the establishment on a list would not be a ground for rejection of the import of such product into the 
territory of Kazakhstan.  The circulation within the EAEU of such product imported into the territory 
of Kazakhstan listed in Annex 19 of this Report may be limited to the territory of Kazakhstan.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.  
754.  She further explained that EEC Council Decision No. 94, in order to facilitate the inclusion 
of the establishments proposed by the competent authority into the Register, also established WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 178 - 
 
  procedures, including time-frames for organising and taking decisions on systems audits, on-site 
visits, and including establishments in the Register in each of the cases described in paragraph 742 above.  The EAEU member State that received the request for audits or for joint inspections of establishments notified the competent authorities of other EAEU member States of the request and 
invited them to participate.  If an EAEU member State declined to participate or did not respond 
within the prescribed time, that EAEU member State authorized the participating EAEU member 
State or member States to act on its behalf and accepted the decision of the participating EAEU 
member State or member States on the relevant matter.  In connection with a systems audit, the 
purpose of the visit was to ensure that, within the framework of the third country's regulatory system, related to production, processing, transpor ting and storage of the relevant goods, all of 
the country's laws, regulations and other requirements on inspection and certification, which the 
EAEU member State(s) recognized as capable to provide a level of protection, at least equivalent 
to that provided by EAEU requirements at the st age of analysis of documentation, were properly 
implemented.  If the EAEU provid ed a third country the authority to list establishments located on 
its territory in the Registry, based on guarantees, the EAEU member States could conduct joint 
inspections of a representative percentage of establishments to check and confirm the operation of the third country's official system of supervision that was the basis for the guarantees. 
Establishments could also be included on the Register based on a joint inspection of the 
establishment. 
755.  The representative of Kazakhstan also noted that audit was conducted pursuant to 
paragraphs 13-45 of EEC Council Decision No. 94 upon request of the competent authority of a 
third country to the authorized body of the EAEU member State with indication of the scope of the 
audit, including a group of controlled goods (product s) and types of activities of controlled objects. 
Thus, documentary analysis was conducted at the first place. Based on the results of documentary 
analysis, the authorized bodies of the EAEU member States made a decision on whether a foreign 
official system of surveillance with regard to relevant goods (products) was equivalent to the EAEU requirements.  If the decision was positive, the authorized bodies of the EAEU member States 
could plan inspections to verify the proper implem entation of the relevant legislation of the third 
country.  For this purpose, the authorized body of  the EAEU member State that planned the audit, 
no later than two months prior to the planned visit to a third country, which had requested the audit, informed the authorized bodies of other EAEU member States.  The authorized bodies of 
other EAEU member States, no later than two weeks after receiving the information on the 
upcoming visit, sent a response that contained re jection or a consent to participate in the visit. 
The absence of response meant the refusal to particip ate in the visit.  The authorized bodies of the 
EAEU member States that had not participated in the audit, considered the decision, based on the 
results received by the visiting authorized body.  After completion of the documentary analysis and 
on-site inspections, the authorized body of the EAEU member State prepared a preliminary report 
on the audit taking into account the provisions of Annex C of the WTO SPS Agreement and sent it 
to other authorized bodies of the EAEU member  States.  The authorized bodies of the EAEU 
member States (including those not participating in  the audit) could submit additional information 
and clarifications on the information and conclusions contained in the preliminary report within two 
months after receipt of the preliminary report.  The authorized body of the EAEU member State 
evaluated additional information and clarifications and, if necessary, made changes to the preliminary report.  Then, the authorized body of  the EAEU member State prepared the additional 
preliminary report and sent it to the competen t authority of the third country.  The competent 
authority of the third country alongside with other interested parties of this third country could submit additional information and clarification on the information and conclusions contained in the 
preliminary report within two months after receipt of the preliminary report.  The authorized body 
of the EAEU member State evaluated the received  information, prepared, published and sent to 
the Commission the final report within two months after receipt of comments to the preliminary report from the competent authority of the third country.  The Commission published the final 
report on its official website.  The final report prepared by the authorized body (authorized bodies) 
of the EAEU member State(s), which participated in the audit, had to contain the conclusion whether the foreign official system of surveillan ce provided the level of protection at least 
equivalent to that in accordance with the EAEU requirements.  The authorized body of the EAEU 
member State published information on this on its official website.  After the publication of information, the competent authority of the third co untry sent to the authorized body of the EAEU 
member State, which organized the audit, a letter with the list of establishments planning to 
export the controlled goods to the EAEU inter alia  for inclusion into the Register.  The authorized 
body of the EAEU member State updated the Regi ster and published the updated Register within 
ten working days. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 179 - 
 
  756.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that joint inspections of establishments 
of third countries were conducted pursuant to paragraphs 60-90 of EEC Council Decision No. 94 
upon request of a competent authority of a third co untry or upon request of the authorized body of 
an EAEU member State.  Time-frame of joint insp ection of an establishment could not exceed the 
time-frame agreed with the competent authority of the third country and could not exceed five 
working days.  The authorized body of EAEU member State planning the joint inspection (hereinafter: the Initiator) not later than three months in advance had to send to the competent 
authority of the third country the list of regulatory legal acts containing relevant norms and 
requirements as well as the list of documents to be submitted by the competent authority of the 
third country and/or by inspected establishment during inspection, in Russian or any other language agreed.  The Initiator informed the au thorized bodies of other EAEU member States 
about the planned joint inspection not later than two months in advance.  The authorized bodies of 
the EAEU member States not later than two weeks after receipt of the information on the planned 
inspection, could send their reply, which contained refusal or consent to participate in the joint 
inspection.  Absence of the reply meant refusal to participate in the inspection.  The Initiator, not 
later than two months in advance of the inspecti on, sent to the competent authority of the third 
country the following information: purpose of the joint inspection; the list of establishments to be 
inspected, as well as list of other establishments involved in production and/or control of relevant 
controlled  goods (products) produced by establishm ents subject to inspection; list of documents, 
which the competent authority of the third country or establishments subject to inspection had to submit during inspection, in Russian or in any other agreed language.  Upon arrival to the 
establishment, the inspectors analysed documents, then visited facilities and other infrastructural 
objects, analysed compliance to the EAEU requirements taking into account equivalency principle; checked the methods and equipment used in State and production control.  Not later than two 
months after completion of the inspection, the Initiator prepared a preliminary report and sent it to 
the authorized bodies of EAEU member States, which participated in the inspection.  The preliminary report had to contain concise legal basis of the inconsistencies revealed in the 
course of inspection as well as include recommendations on corrective actions for the competent 
authority and the concerned establishment.  Authoriz ed bodies of EAEU member States sent to the 
Initiator their replies not later than two weeks upon receipt of the preliminary report. Absence of the reply meant consent to the preliminary report.  The Initiator, taking into account replies of 
other member States, which had participated in the inspection, within three months after 
completion of the inspection sent the preliminary report on joint inspection to the competent authority of the third country.  The competent authority of the third country, within two months, 
could send its reply containing comments, additional information, including information on 
measures undertaken to correct incompliance, as well as clarifications for the Initiator.  Absence of the reply meant consent to the preliminary report.  After receipt of the reply from the competent 
authority or upon expiration of the established time-frame if the reply was not received, the 
Initiator, not later one month, prepared and sent th e draft final report to the authorized bodies of 
EAEU member States, which participated in the inspection.  The authorized bodies of EAEU member States not later than two weeks after receipt of the draft final report sent their replies to 
the Initiator.  Absence of the reply meant consent to the draft final report.  The initiator, taking 
into account the replies of the EAEU member States, which participated in the inspection, within two weeks after receipt of the replies from the au thorized bodies, sent the final report on joint 
inspection to the competent authority of the third country.  Final report had to contain conclusions 
on each inspected establishment, included or not included in the Register, and recommendations on corrective measures, which had to be taken by th e establishments in order to be included in the 
Register. The Initiator published the final report on its official website and sent it to the competent 
authority of the third country within five workin g days after completion of the final report.  
The Initiator updated the Register within ten working days after completion of the final report and notified the competent authority of the third country about the update. 
757.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that with respect to request for authorization 
to provide guarantees, the EAEU member State that received such request from a third country had to coordinate its decision with the other EAEU member States.  Criteria for accepting 
guarantees were established in paragraph 48 of EEC  Council Decision No. 94.  Non-conformity with 
these criteria could serve as a basis for refusal to accept the guarantee from third country's competent authority.  In general, the requirem ent to reach consensus between all EAEU member 
States with respect to approval of exporting es tablishments was necessary due to the absence of 
customs borders between territories of the EAEU member States and given the fact that the competence of establishment approval re mained under the national competence.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further clarified that a decision on suspension of exports from WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 180 - 
 
  establishments was made based on obvious facts of inconsistencies with EAEU requirements that 
posed substantial risk to life and health of humans and/or animals.  Thus, such decision could be made individually by an EAEU member State. Mo reover, suspension of exports was a provisional 
measure and exports could be resumed as soon as the corrective measures were undertaken by 
the establishment.  At the same time, the decision on inclusion of establishments under the 
guarantee required a more complex evaluation process and, thus, had to be agreed by all EAEU member States.   
758.  Some Members expressed concerns that the procedure for listing establishments based on 
guarantees was more cumbersome than that for suspending an establishment, since the former 
required the consent of all EAEU member States while the latter required a decision by only one 
EAEU member State.  Members viewed such dispar ity of treatment as unjustified and contrary to 
the spirit of the WTO Agreements.  Furthermore,  Members expressed concerns regarding the lack 
of effectiveness and predictability of the mechanis m of listing based on guarantees, the lack of a 
clear time-frame for being granted the authority to provide guarantees, the lack of justification of 
refusals to accept guarantees, and the absence of definition of the scope of these guarantees.  
Those Members also had concerns over statements by the representatives of Kazakhstan as well as over draft EAEU amendments to CU Commission Decision No. 834.  These  amendments 
indicated that a suspension of trade from an esta blishment or for a type of product, while decided 
by one EAEU member State, was applied to the whole EAEU territory.  These Members had experienced that suspensions and temporary restrictions taken for an establishment were not connected to an identified risk or not proporti onate to the risk identified.  They asked for 
confirmation that a suspension could not be decided before a risk assessment justifying the 
measure was carried out and that this risk assessment will be provided to a trade partner concerned upon request. 
759.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that according to EEC Council Decision No. 94, 
which had replaced the CU Commission Decision  No. 834, the mechanism for inclusion of third 
country's establishments in the Register on the ba sis of guarantees included deadlines and reasons 
for refusal to accept guarantees, as well as the timing and scope of such guarantees.  She further 
noted that prior to the creation of the EAEU ther e was no register of third country establishments 
in Kazakhstan.  In order not to restrict trade with other countries the vast majority of third country establishments was included in the Register on th e basis of guarantees provided by the competent 
authorities of third countries.  Inclusion of esta blishments in the Register was carried out by 
EAEU member States in a coordinated manner because goods exported from these establishments could freely move within the EAEU and had access to the territory of all EAEU member States. 
She further stated that temporary suspensions of imports from an establishment were not imposed 
automatically.  They could be imposed only at the request of the third country or in case of 
repeated identification of non-compliance, which was notified to the competent authority of the 
exporting country and which posed significant risk to human and animal life and health.  
Kazakhstan would provide a risk assessment ju stifying the measure, upon request from a 
concerned trade partner.  In other instances, consistent measures, such as increased laboratory monitoring, warning, special requirements, such as application of additional or replacement 
measures, were applied in order not to stop ex ports from such establishments. Such decisions 
were made by an EAEU member State based on the repeated violations of the EAEU requirements and they could not contradict the principles and th e spirit of the WTO SPS Agreement.  She further 
noted that taking into account comments from interested parties, the provisions in accordance 
with which restriction of imports from an establishment imposed by one EAEU member State applied to the entire EAEU territory were not present in the newly adopted EEC Council Decision 
No. 94. 
760.  Some Members requested more information on how Kazakhstan and the EAEU intended to 
implement the three mechanisms for including establishments in the Register.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that currently, all guarantees, received from third countries by an authorized 
body of any EAEU member State, were subject to  approval by the authorized bodies of other 
EAEU member States.  In response to Members' further questions, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that EEC Council Decision  No. 94 provided that one basic principle for 
ensuring veterinary safety of controlled goods when inclusion in the Register was required, was 
conducting an audit of foreign official system of veterinary control (systems audit) as recommended by Codex Alimentarius.  As such, EEC Council Decision No. 94 provided three ways 
for a country to have establishments located on  its territory included in the Register of 
establishments authorized to export as described in paragraph 742 above.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 181 - 
 
  761.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, in Chapter II, point 5 of EEC Council 
Decision No. 94, EAEU requirements were defined as follows:  "international standards, guidelines and recommendations within the meaning of CU Commission Decision No. 721 "On Application of International Standards, Recommendations and Guid elines" of 22 June 2011, related to veterinary 
and sanitary requirements for controlled good s, EAEU Technical Regulations, EAEU Common 
Veterinary Requirements, and/or the different requirements that EAEU member States have 
agreed with the third country in veterinary export certificates, as provided in CU Commission 
Decision No. 726 "On Veterinary Measures" of 15 July 2011, and mandatory national requirements 
for goods". 
762.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that EEC Council Decision No. 94  
"On Regulation on Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods 
(Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surve illance)" of 9 October 2014 provided for removal 
of an establishment from the Registry (delisting) in  only two cases:  at the request of the relevant 
establishment, and at the request of the compet ent authority of the third country.  Instead of 
delisting an establishment, the EAEU could, in line with international standards or based on risk 
assessment, temporarily suspend imports from the establishment and/or subject imports from that 
establishment to intensified monitoring.  Except in emergency situations, understood in the sense 
provided for in the OIE, a temporary suspension of  imports from an establishment could be applied 
only: 
- upon the request of the establishment or the competent authority of the third country; or  
- based on repeated non-compliances with EAEU requirements either detected during on-site 
inspection and/or re-inspection of the establishment by the competent authority of an 
EAEU member State, or as a result of monitoring and enhanced laboratory testing of the establishment's goods, which have been notified to the competent authority of the third 
country, if such non-compliances represented a significant threat to human or animal life 
and health.   
The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
763.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed 
that, currently, the Committee of Veterinary Control and Surveillance was not entitled to delist an establishment on the basis of minor non-complianc es with EAEU requirements or requirements 
included in the certificate not affecting the sa fety of the products, observed during on-site 
inspection or laboratory analysis at the border or based on issues which fall outside of the 
Committee's field of competence (e.g. controls on potable water).  
764.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, except in case of serious risks of animal 
or human health, its competent authority would not suspend imports from establishments based 
on the results of on-site inspection before it had given the exporting country the opportunity to propose corrective measures.  As required under EEC Council Decision No. 94 "On Regulation on 
Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to 
Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 9 October 201 4, the preliminary report would be sent to the 
competent authority of the exporting country for comments before the report was finalized. She noted again that the EAEU member States had developed criteria and reasons for a decision to 
suspend imports from an establishment. Minor errors would not be valid grounds for suspending 
imports from an establishment and she reminded Members that there would be an administrative procedure for appealing such decisions as well as recourse to the courts.  The Working Party took 
note of this commitment. 
765.  Regarding emergency situations, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the 
decisions and procedures for the suspension of es tablishments would be in accordance with the 
WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  The Working Party 
took note of this commitment. 
766.  The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that in extraordinary cases, the 
Commission could take a decision to suspend a group of establishments or all establishments of a 
third country as the result of the detection of a se rious systemic failure of the official system of 
control, as specified in EEC Council Decision No. 94 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 182 - 
 
  (Surveillance)" of 9 October 2014.  The representa tive of Kazakhstan confirmed that, upon taking 
such a decision, the Commission would have to provide the Competent Authority of the third country with the technical information and scientific justification on the risk detected.  The third country would be requested to take corrective measures within a specified timeframe for their 
adoption.  Any suspension would not be implemented before the expiration of the specified 
timeframe.  Once the corrective measures were taken, the Competent Authority of the third country would send a report on the corrective measures to the Commission.  The Commission 
would evaluate the report and it would decide if the corrective measures were effective and 
sufficient.  The suspension, if implemented, would be lifted within five working days after the decision.  In case corrective measures were no t taken or were considered ineffective by the 
Commission, the decision on a temporary suspension of imports from a group of establishments or 
all establishments of a third country could be im plemented.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that such temporary suspensions would be  proportionate to the risk to human health or 
life and not more restrictive to trade than necessary, as provided in the WTO Agreement on the 
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Meas ures. The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
767.  Members expressed concerns about a draft am endment to EAEU veterinary requirements 
that introduced a new listing obligation for establishments supplying raw materials to 
establishments that exported animal products to the EAEU. Members were concerned that this draft amendment mandated that raw materials used in the production of animal products for the EAEU must only come from establishments approv ed for export to the EAEU.  Members noted that 
this could have far reaching ramifications and would be administratively difficult to implement and 
seemed to be lacking proportionality to any associated risk. 
768.  In reply the representative of Kazakhstan noted that the draft amendment to EAEU 
veterinary requirements that introduced the requirement for third country establishments, which 
produced products containing components of animal origin for export to the EAEU, to use raw materials of animal origin produced by establis hments approved to supply products to the EAEU 
territory, was suspended and sent for further elaboration and risk assessment. This requirement 
would not be considered further without risk a ssessment presented by one of the EAEU member 
States that would justify the measure. 
769.  Members of the Working Party expressed concer n that the draft inspection guidelines for 
meat, poultry, fish, and dairy were stricter than international standards, guidelines and 
recommendations, in particular they were overly prescriptive and in many cases would be difficult to respect in other cases than the EAEU context.  Requiring establishments to meet these overly 
prescriptive structural and functional requiremen ts would, in practice, preclude most non-EAEU 
establishments from passing inspection.  Furt hermore, Members highlighted that these draft 
guidelines did not take into account the possibili ty for exporting countries to conclude specific 
certificates with EAEU member States, as provided for in CU Commission Decision No. 726, and 
thus to be subjected to specific requirements.  Members asked how equivalence could be recognized when the specific standards set in these inspection guidelines could not be met. 
770.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that Kazakhstan and EAEU member 
States had developed Guidelines for Inspectors on Determining the Equivalency of Veterinary 
Measures Applied by Third Countries when Conduc ting Inspections of Establishments Subject to 
Veterinary Control and Audit of Official Systems of Control of Third Countries; Guidelines for 
Inspection of Facilities and Vessels for Harvesting and Processing Aquatic Animals, Including Fish; 
Guidelines for Inspecting Dairy Industry Establishments; and Guidelines for Inspecting Animal Slaughter Facilities and Meat Industry Establishments, adopted by EEC Council Decision No. 94, as 
Annex 2 and Annex 3, that included inspection guidelines for meat, poultry, fish, and dairy.  She 
further explained that, prior to the adoption of th e guidelines, the national legislation of an EAEU 
member State that received the request for inspection had been applied.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the adopted guidelines had been developed in accordance with the 
Codex Alimentarius standards. 
771.  She further explained that EEC Council Decision No. 94 recognized the principle of 
equivalence.  Specifically, inspectors were instructed to evaluate whether establishments were 
complying with relevant EAEU requirements or the relevant international standards, guidelines, 
and recommendations, and in such cases, the es tablishment would be considered in compliance 
with EAEU requirements based on the principle of equivalence.  She further explained that if there WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 183 - 
 
  were cases where an EAEU act or mandatory nati onal requirement was more stringent than the 
international standard, the inspector would evaluate compliance with international standards, guidelines, and recommendations, unless a scientific justification for the more stringent measure, as provided for in the WTO SPS Agreement, had be en presented to the competent authority of the 
third country.  The competent authority could th en propose an equivalent measure.  If an 
establishment was included in the Register based on guarantees from the competent authority of 
the exporting country, inspectors were bound to check and evaluate whether the guarantees in the 
export certification applicable were met. 
772.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that  as of the date of accession of Kazakhstan 
to the WTO, specific guidelines on inspection that would reflect the principles of equivalence and reliance on international standards, guidelines and recommendations, as such principles were 
described in paragraph 771 above, would be adopted and applied to ensure the implementation of 
EEC Council Decision No. 94 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 9 October 2014 
by EAEU inspectors, in accordance with the WTO  Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures.  Under these guidelines, referred to in paragraph 770 above, inspectors were instructed in particular to verify the compliance of establishments with relevant Codex 
Alimentarius recommended codes of practices such as CAC/RCP 1-1969, recommended 
International Code of Practice General Principles  of Food Hygiene, the CAC/RCP 58-2005 Code of 
Hygienic Practice for Meat, the CAC/RCP 57-2004 Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk 
Products, the CAC/RCP 52-2003 Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products and other Relevant 
International Standards, Recommendations and Related Texts. The guidelines replaced previously 
existing national legislation of Kazakhstan concerning inspection of establishments, and would constitute the reference used by EAEU inspectors to assess compliance of exporting establishments 
with EAEU requirements.  Moreover, inspectors would be provided information and training on the 
application of the principle of equivalence as provided in the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, in the context of EEC Council Decision No. 94 
"On Regulation on Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods 
(Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 9 October 2014 and the guidelines.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
773.  Some Members expressed concern that CU Commission Decision No. 834 set-up a detailed 
and prescriptive system for auditing third-country  systems for supervision of products subject to 
veterinary control, while it appeared that the requirements for EAEU member States and their respective establishments appeared to be less detailed and stringent in some respects. 
These Members asked whether and how it would be ensured, for example, that the frequency and 
requirements related to on-site visits as applied to third countries and their establishments and to EAEU member States and their establishments fo r purposes of determination and maintenance of 
equivalence, would be no less favourable to third countries and their establishments, and not 
discriminate against such countries or establishments. 
774.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, in her view, EEC Council 
Decision No. 94, which had replaced CU Commis sion Decision No. 834, and the procedures and 
requirements for the conduct of audits and insp ections applied in respect of Members, their 
products or establishments were in compliance with the WTO rules and requirements.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that Chapter VII of the EEC Council Decision No. 94 
provided the procedure of joint inspection of establishments of the EAEU for inclusion into the 
Register of Establishments of the EAEU, which is similar to the procedure of joint inspection of establishments of third countries for inclusion in the Register (of establishments of third countries). 
In accordance with paragraph 107 of the EEC Counci l Decision No. 94 in a case where a system of 
establishment inspections of one of the EAEU member States were recognized as equivalent, establishments located in the territory of that EAEU member State had to be included into the 
Register of Establishments of the EAEU without conducting a joint inspection, which is similar to 
the procedure of audit of official system of surveillance of a third country. In other words, 
measures applied to establishments of the EAEU were similar to measures applied to establishments of third countries. 
775.  Some Members requested more information on the timing of the audits once the audit 
request was sent to an EAEU member State.  These Members expressed concerns that the implementation of the audit system  seemed lengthy and burdensome. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 184 - 
 
  776.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that to date, Kazakhstan had not received any 
requests from third countries to carry out an audit.  On the basis of the requests sent to other EAEU member States, a Schedule of Audits and Inspections for first half of 2014 had been prepared by the EAEU member States.  Publication of the Schedule currently was not provided in 
the EAEU legislation, however the EAEU member States were planning to amend the relevant 
legislation in order to publish the Schedule.  She further added that timing of audits depended on the number of requests received from third countries and the availability of financial and human 
resourses for conducting such audits.  In addition, the EEC Council Decision No. 94 contained 
procedures of audit, with specific timeframes, as specified in paragraph 755. 
777.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, by the date that Kazakhstan became a 
Member of the WTO, EEC Council Decision No. 94 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint 
Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control 
(Surveillance)" of 9 October 2014, as described in the Working Party Report, would be applied in compliance with the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, 
including Article 2.3 thereof, and the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994.  
In particular, she confirmed that EEC Council Decision No. 94 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control 
(Surveillance)" of 9 October 2014 would not arbi trarily or unjustifiably discriminate between 
Members, where identical or similar conditions prevail, including between EAEU member States which were Members and other Members, with regards to requirements for on-site inspections, including for purposes of determination and maintenance of equivalence of the systems of control 
of products; and that EEC Council Decision No. 94 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint 
Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 9 October 2014 would not be applied in a manner which would constitute a 
disguised restriction on international trade.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- (iii) Import Permits 778.  As for import permits, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that since July 2010, the 
legal framework for the import permit regime of the EAEU was set-out in Section VI of the 
Regulation on Veterinary Control, adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 317.  This Regulation set-out the following principles:  
- Imports into the EAEU of certain goods subject to veterinary controls must have an import 
permit issued by the competent authority of the EAEU member State which was the point of 
destination for the imports; and 
- The permit was valid for a calendar year, for quantities which were specified in the permit.  
The permit was issued taking into account the epiz ootic situation of the place of production and, 
where the legislation required a registry of enterp rises authorized to export the relevant goods to 
the territory of the EAEU, whether the enterprise wa s on that list of enterprises.  Furthermore, 
"Rules of Issuing of Permits for Importation, Expo rtation and Transit of Goods Taking into Account 
Epizootic Situation of the Corresponding Territory" had been set at the national level by Government Resolution No. 132 of 19 January 201 2, which had been replaced by Order of the 
Minister of Agriculture No. 16-04/647 of 9 December 2014 (hereinafter: Order No. 16-04/647). 
779.  She further explained that an import permit could be requested for any amount of goods 
and that the amount requested could not be the basis for refusing to issue the permit. 
Import permits had three functions: first, to ensure  that the importer was in a position to handle 
the imported goods in a safe manner that complied with domestic, e.g., quarantine requirements; 
second, to take into account the epizootic situation of the exporting country; and third, to ensure that specific conditions, adapted to the epizootic situation of the exporting country, were met at 
the time of importation.  The first function, in her view, was not discriminatory since the conditions 
required to be met by the operator were also checked in case of internal trade within the 
EAEU territory.  The second function was that of a legal instrument to block or restrict imports in case of dangerous animal disease outbreaks in th e exporting country.  The third function could be 
used, for example, to require that certain imported animal products from countries with a specific 
epizootic situation be processed in designated facilities.  In this case, import permits would be granted only to those importers who were able to channel the consignments to such facilities.  
Import permits also optimised logistics for importer s and provided a means to coordinate activities 
of regulatory agencies. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 185 - 
 
  780.  As established in Order No. 16-04/647, import permits were issued by the authorized body 
in the sphere of veterinary (the Committee of Veterinary Control and Surveillance under the Ministry of Agriculture) upon request of its te rritorial branches.  The Chief State Veterinary 
Inspector of a particular region was in charge of  the epizootic and veterinary-sanitary safety of 
that region.  Therefore, to obtain an import permit, traders applied in writing to the relevant region 
(rayon/city) branch of the authorized body wh ere the imported goods were being shipped.  
This was done for the convenience of importers.  Applications had to contain a description of the 
goods' characteristics, country and place (establishm ent) of origin, purpose, transport type, route, 
the border entry point(s) of Kazakhstan, place of destination in Kazakhstan with indication of the name and registration number of production or storage facility.  In addition, Order No. 16-04/647 added requirements, including the location of the establishment, quarantine, processing and 
storage conditions, and the establishment's registration number, where required, and/or name of 
the establishment in the country of exportation.  Region branches verified the compliance of 
transportation and storage facilities with veterinary rules, while the central authorized body 
verified: (i) whether the exporting country was subj ect to a temporary ban due to an outbreak of 
an infectious disease, (ii) whether non-compliance with the EAEU veterinary and sanitary requirements had occurred, and (iii) presence of  exporting establishment in the Register, where 
such a requirement applied.  In cases where the requirements for obtaining import permit were 
not met, the exporter could re-apply after fulfilling  the requirements.  The authorized body issued 
the import permit within ten working days, but could also refuse a permit by written justification.   
781.  Some Members expressed concern at the general nature of the reasons for refusing the 
import permit and the lack of elements such as necessity or proportionality to the seriousness of 
the risk for health involved by such non-compliance.  They sought clarification on whether the planned amendment to this Resolution would intr oduce these elements, which would be necessary 
in their view to ensure compliance with the corresponding WTO principles.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan informed Members that Kazakhstan adopted Order No. 16-04/647 that included such elements as necessity and/or proportionality to th e seriousness of the risk for health involved by 
non-compliance as part of reasons for refusing the import permits. 
782.  A Member of the Working Party asked Kazakhstan to clarify what constituted a 
non-compliance and whether the permit would be denied if the information provided by the trader would not comply with import permit requirements, e.g., storage.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that pursuant to Order No. 16- 04/647, import permits could be refused only for 
the following reasons: (i) in accordance with OIE guidelines, recommendations and standards and 
the WTO SPS Agreement, introduction of restrictions with respect to certain countries (regions) 
with unfavourable epizootic situation in the exporting country, which was verified, including 
through contacts with the competent authorities of third countries; (ii) unacceptable level of sanitary and veterinary risk arising from non-compliance with EAEU veterinary-sanitary 
requirements of the EAEU as defined in the EAEU  legal framework, including EEC Council Decision 
No. 94, national legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan or sanitary and veterinary attestations agreed in bilateral certificates, as applicable; (iii), absence of an exporting establishment in the Register of Exporting Third Count ries, where such a requirement applied; (iv) introduction of 
temporary restriction with respect to the exportin g establishment indicated in the application; or 
(v) introduction of restrictive measures on the pa rt of the territory of Kazakhstan, to which the 
goods were destined or through which the goods woul d be transited.  In this case, import permit 
was rejected only if the imported good was capable of transmitting the disease in question. 
Kazakhstan being an EAEU member State followed "Common Veterinary (Veterinary and Sanitary) Requirements, to Goods Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)", approved by CU 
Commission Decision No. 317, as amended. 
783.  Some Members requested that when Kazakhstan's authorities denied an application for an 
import permit, they informed each applicant of the detailed reasons for the rejection and the exporting country if new conditions existed in that country would be the reason for refusing the 
import permit.  The representative of Kazakhstan  explained that the authorized body reviewed 
applications within ten working days.  Within this period, the authorized body either issued an import permit or provided the applicant a written explanation of denial. 
784.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that it had made available to importers, as 
well as to third-country exporters through the website of the Ministry of Agriculture http://mgov.kz/napravleniya-razvitiya/information-for-third-countries full detailed conditions for 
import of specific products.  Furthermore, information on EAEU veterinary requirements was WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 186 - 
 
  available on the EAEU website at the followi ng address: http://www. eurasiancommission.org/ 
en/act/texnreg/Pages/acts.aspx.   The representative  of Kazakhstan further confirmed that to this 
end, it would publish a list on the website of the National Enquiry Point in English of the products which were permitted to be imported into its territory; the countries and establishments 
authorised to export to Kazakhstan; and the conditions for import.  Where an application for an 
import permit was denied, the Committee of Veterina ry Control and Surveillance of the Ministry of 
Agriculture of Kazakhstan would inform the applicant of the reasons for this rejection within ten 
working days of the decision.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
785.  Some Members asked Kazakhstan to confirm that its import permit system would comply 
with OIE rules, i.e., permits would not be refuse d on grounds not recognized by the OIE for the 
animal diseases concerned.  Further, with regard  to the discovery of unauthorized substances in 
cargos, Kazakhstan would comply with the principle of applying an SPS measure only to the extent 
necessary to protect human or animal life and health .  In the view of these Members, a refusal to 
issue import permit after single findings of non-compliances with no immediate risk for the 
consumer would not comply with this principle.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
its procedures for considering applications for import permits would comply with these two principles.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
786.  A Member of the Working Party expressed conc erns regarding the import permit process 
for products under veterinary control.  In light of other veterinary and sanitary import requirements (e.g., an agreed veterinary certific ate), the Member considered the import permit 
process as an unnecessary requirement that could result in a barrier to trade in violation of the 
WTO SPS Agreement.  This Member of the Wo rking Party noted that when developing SPS 
measures to protect human, animal or plant life or health within a country, the WTO SPS Agreement required that Members take into acco unt the objective of minimizing negative trade 
effects and that such measures were not more trade-restrictive than required to achieve an 
appropriate level of SPS protection.  The Member  of the Working Party questioned compliance of 
Kazakhstan's measures with the WTO SPS Agreement obligations. 
787.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that use of import permit system in veterinary 
import control was not prohibited by the WTO SPS Agreement. Further, the representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that import permit was important element of ensuring safety of the 
imported goods en route  since veterinary authorities of exporting countries could ensure safety of 
exported goods only within the territory under its control.  She noted that import permits 
contained information outside of the competence of veterinary authority of exporting country, such as:  purpose, transport type, route, the border entr y point(s) of Kazakhstan, place of destination in 
Kazakhstan with indication of the name and registration number of production or storage facility, 
where required, and in the case of importing goods falling under CITES - the relevant import permitting number.  This information was not present in veterinary certificates. 
788.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
minor documentation errors, which did not alter the basic data contained in the document, were not a basis for refusing an import permit.  The legal circumstance that served as grounds for starting this administrative procedure for revocation of an import permit was the discovery of 
systematic (e.g., liable to administrative or criminal prosecution) violations, by the importer of the 
regulated cargo, of EAEU Decisions and other EAEU Acts and the laws of Kazakhstan in the field of 
veterinary medicine (including the presentation of  forged veterinary documents or the discovery of 
inconsistency between the presented documents and the regulated cargo).  Furthermore, she 
confirmed that the reasons for suspension, cancellation, or refusal of an import permit would be consistent with international standards, recommendations, and guidelines and the WTO Agreement 
on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment. 
789.  Further, the representative of Kazakhstan co nfirmed that from the date of accession of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO, the import permit regime  applicable to goods subject to veterinary and 
quarantine control would be operated under EAEU Decisions, other EAEU Acts, and provisions of 
the Law of Kazakhstan that were published and av ailable to the public and that these measures 
would be developed and applied in compliance with the WTO Agreement.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan also confirmed that information requirements for the purposes of applying for an 
import permit would be limited to what was necessary for appropriate approval and control 
procedures and that any requirements for control, inspection and approval of individual specimens WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 187 - 
 
  of a product were limited to what is reasonable and necessary as provided for in Annex C of the 
WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  Moreover, she confirmed that her Government would maintain and notify the public of a clearly defined procedure under which an applicant for an import permit could appeal the suspension, cancellation, or refusal 
of an application, have that appeal adjudicate d, and receive a written response explaining the 
reasons for the final decision and any further action required to obtain a permit.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
790.  Pursuant to CU Commission Decision No. 317, at the border, a veterinary inspector 
conducted (i) a documentary check and (ii) a physical inspection of the goods being imported.  Samples at the border were taken only in case a veterinary inspector detected visible organoleptic changes.  The veterinary inspector informed the re levant oblast branch of the authorized body (at 
the border) about the results of the inspection of  the product subject to veterinary control and 
about the final destination of the product.  Impo rted goods were then transported to their final 
destination where they were subjected to a visual  inspection of the consignment.  After passing 
the inspection, the veterinary certificate issued by the competent body of the foreign country was 
replaced with the veterinary certificate of the EAEU.  The accompanying documents were stamped with the sign "Release permitted" or "Release forbidden".  Thus, the imported goods that passed 
the veterinary control where considered as EAEU goods and subsequently were subject to the 
same treatment as domestically produced goods.  She added that, pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article 17 of Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002, if a cargo owner was not satisfied with the results of veterinary control, he or she could appeal the actions (or failure to act) of 
veterinary inspectors to higher State veterinary officials  or local executive bodies, and/or in court.   
791.  In response to Members' questions, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the 
legislation of Kazakhstan and of the EAEU did not contain rules obliging exporting countries to 
carry out veterinary and sanitary checks at th e external borders of exporting parties.   
792.  A Working Party Member requested that Kazakhstan guarantee that there would not be 
such procedures in place, which caused undue delays and ensure treatment in no less favourable 
manner for imported products than for like domestic  products.  The Member stated that the control 
system seemed to be a duplication of checking - first at the border and then under customs control.  In this respect, this Member asked th e representative of Kazakhstan to confirm further 
that there would be no undue delays with this system in place.  This Member of the Working Party 
expressed the view that additional testing appeared excessive given that a shipment had to be 
accompanied by a veterinary certificate and import permit and come from an approved facility and had been inspected prior to exportation.  This Member further noted that Kazakhstan's 
requirements for inspection at the border and then a full re-inspection for all shipments when 
clearing customs appeared to be unjustified for SP S reasons, a burden on trade, and inconsistent 
with national treatment.  Another Member of th e Working Party enquired if and how Kazakhstan 
was planning to introduce the mechanism of random inspections instead of samples of each 
specific shipment (the current system).  
793.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that pursuant to paragraph 6.5 of the 
Regulation on Veterinary Control, adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 317, after documentary 
checks, physical inspections were carried out on a random basis as follows:  not more often than 
one consignment per ten consignments of meat  or fish and one consignment per twenty 
consignments of other controlled goods originating from a specific country, except for live animals, 
where each consignment was subject to physical inspection.  Physical inspection on the border 
could be conducted by checking of accessible part  of the consignment.  Laboratory tests were 
conducted only in cases of revealing visible organoleptic changes during physical checks 
(paragraph 3.14.3). Kazakhstan had removed the requirement of laboratory checks of each 
imported consignment and replaced it with the syst em of keeping a register of exporting facilities 
of third countries.  In her view, such a practice was widely used in the most advanced WTO Members and was not contradictory to the WTO SPS Agreement. 
- (iv) Transit Permits 
794.  With respect to transit, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that since 1 July 2010, the 
legal framework for the issuance of transit permits was set in CU Commission Decision No. 317, in 
Chapter VII of the "Regulation on the Single System of Veterinary Control at the Customs Border WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 188 - 
 
  of the Customs Union" as amended by CU Commission Decision No. 724 of 22 June 2011.  
The principles set at the EAEU level were the following: 
- A transit permit was required only for transit of live animals and raw materials of animal 
origin.  The transit permit was issued by the EAEU member State whose territory was the 
first entry point; 
- Veterinary control of controlled goods at entry points was carried out after the submission 
of a waybill and/or veterinary certificate; 
- After completion of documentary control, veterinary inspection of animals was carried out, 
including:  identification numbers of animals were compared (tattoos, chips, ear tags, stamps, etc.) with numbers indicated in veterinary certificates, conditions of carriage were verified, and the condition of animals and possi bility of their further transportation were 
examined; 
- Examination during transit of controlled goods (except for animals) was performed only by 
State regulatory authorities at a checkpoint or in the presence of information about 
non-conformity of controlled goods to the declared goods; 
- According to the results of monitoring, the Border Control Inspection Post Officer made a 
decision and put a stamp on the shipping documents and on the veterinary certificate, in 
accordance with the form of Annex No. 3: "Transit enabled" or "Transit prohibited", and at 
the point of exit from the customs territory of the EAEU, a stamp "Transit Completed", then assured it by the seal and signature, indicating such Officer's name and initials; 
- All necessary data was entered in the register of transit in the form in accordance with 
Annex No. 9 of the Regulation and entered into the system of electronic records; and 
- The owner of the controlled goods, who received  the permit of transit of controlled goods 
through the territory of the EAEU, had to comply with the veterinary legislation of the 
EAEU. 
795.  According to Order No. 16-04/647, transit permits were issued within 30 working days 
upon written application with indication of the following information: 
- for juridical persons carrying transited goods:  name, address and registration number of 
the production facility, for natural persons carrying transited goods: family name, given name, patronymic (if any), address and regist ration number of the production facility; 
- name of the transited goods; 
- quantity of the transited goods and its measurement unit; 
- exporting or importing country and country of origin; - type of transport; 
- list of border checkpoints of Kazakhstan through which the goods will be transited; and, 
- transit route, places of stopping, loading-unloa ding, places of animal feeding, conditions of 
animal or goods transfer coordinated with a chief veterinary inspector of territorial 
administrative unit, or his deputy, thro ugh which the goods will be transited. 
In accordance with Order No. 16-04/647, a transit permit could be refused only for the following 
reasons: (i) absence of any of the above information; (ii) unfavourable epizootic situation in the country or region of origin and transited places in accordance with the OIE guidelines, 
recommendations and standards; and (iii) importing country did not permit such imports. 
796.  Some Members expressed concerns regarding the requirement that controlled goods in 
transit, which had been inspected and were conveyed under seal, had to comply with 
EAEU veterinary requirements.  From these Member s' perspective, this requirement could not be 
justified as a safety measure and restricted trade with third countries. 
797.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted concerns from Members regarding the 
requirement for controlled goods in transit to comply with EAEU veterinary requirements and 
confirmed that CU Commission Decision No. 317 "On the Application of Veterinary-Sanitary 
Measures in the Customs Union" of 18 June 2010 had been amended by CU Commission Decision No. 724 of 22 June 2011 to eliminate this requirement, so that, controlled goods transiting through 
the territory of the EAEU under customs seal  would not be subject to EAEU veterinary 
requirements.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the relevant provisions of CU Commission Decision No. 317 "On the Application of Veterinary-Sanitary 
Measures in the Customs Union" of 18 June 2010, and any administrative regulations and other 
measures relating to the transit of goods subjec t to veterinary control through the territory of WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 189 - 
 
  Kazakhstan would be applied in compliance with  the OIE Code and the WTO Agreement on the 
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Meas ures.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
(e) Trade in Goods Subject to Phytosanitary Control 
798.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Section XI (Articles 56, 59) and Annex 
No. 12 of the EAEU Treaty provided the legal fr amework for plant quarantine in Kazakhstan.  
These provisions stipulated that regulations must take into account the international and regional 
standards, guidelines and/or recommendations, except for the cases when, based on appropriate 
scientific justification, phytosanitary quarantine measures that ensure a higher level of phytosanitary quarantine protection than measures based on relevant international and regional standards, guidelines and/or recommendations we re applied. EAEU plant quarantine measures 
were further established in CU Commission Decision No. 318 "On Providing Plant Quarantine in the 
Customs Union" of 18 June 2010 (as last amended by EEC Council Decision No. 93 of 9 October 2014). CU Commission Decision No. 318 included the following documents: 
- The list of products under quarantine (regul ated goods, regulated articles of regulated 
products), i.e., which are subject to quarantine phytosanitary control (surveillance) at the customs border of the Customs Union/EAEU an d in the customs territory of the Customs 
Union/EAEU; 
- Regulations on the implementation of quarantine phytosanitary control (surveillance) at 
the customs border of the Customs Union/EAEU; and 
- Regulation on the implementation of quarantine phytosanitary control (surveillance) at the 
customs territory of the Customs Union/EAEU. 
799.  The representative of Kazakhstan further clarified that the EAEU did not have common 
phytosanitary requirements and that these were de veloped and implemented at the national level.  
The representative explained that further harmonization among the EAEU member States was 
ongoing.  For example, the EAEU member States were in the process of reviewing and conducting 
pest risk assessments in order to harmonize the quarantine pest and disease list, with subsequent 
introduction of common phytosanitary requirements  to regulated products by December 2015.  
The draft common list of quarantine pests and di seases had been developed and undergone public 
consultations in July 2012.  At the moment, the draft was under discussion by the EAEU member States.  Until the EAEU member States had harmonized their quarantine pest and disease list and 
introduced common phytosanitary requirements, the national quarantine pest and disease lists and 
phytosanitary requirements for regulated products would remain valid.   
800.  A Member of the Working Party asked Kazakhstan to clarify whether Kazakhstan's 
legislation was based on international standards developed by the IPPC.  In reply the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on plant quarantine to a large extent was based on the prov isions and principles stipulated by the WTO SPS 
Agreement, the International Plant Protection Convention and the Convention for the 
Establishment of the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization.  For instance, 
Article 13 of Law No. 344-I "On Plant Quarantine" of 11 February 1999 (hereinafter: Law "On Plant Quarantine") and the Government Resolution No. 1 730 "On Approval of the Rules for Protection of 
the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan from  Plant Quarantine Objects and Alien Species" of 
30 October 2009, which provided for the procedures of issuing documents, inspections and control complied with IPPC standards such as No. 12 "Guideline on phytosanitary certificates", No. 23 
"Guideline on inspections" and No. 7 "Certification system for exports".  Kazakhstan accepted 
phytosanitary certificates that complied with the requirements of IPPC Standard No. 12 and relied on guarantees of the NPPO of the exporting co untry.  She also added that the time-frames of 
laboratory expertise on pests and weeds were re duced to up to three working days, and plant 
diseases – to ten working days.  In addition, with in the framework of the EAEU, quarantine import 
permits on import of quarantine products were abolished. 
801.  Trade in regulated products on the territory of  the Republic of Kazakhstan in addition to 
EAEU regulations was regulated by the following national legislation:  Government Resolution 
No. 1295 "On Approval of the List of Quarantine Facilities, Alien Species and Extremely Dangerous 
Pests" of 10 December 2002, Government Resolution No. 1287 "On Approval of the Rules on 
Withdrawal and Destruction of Quarantine Products , Infected by Quarantine Objects, Not Subject 
to Decontamination or Processing" of 3 November 2011, Government Resolution No. 1730 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 190 - 
 
  "On Approval of the Rules for Protection of the Te rritory of the Republic of Kazakhstan from Plant 
Quarantine Objects and Alien Species" of 30 October 2009, Government Resolution No. 1674 "On Approval of Phytosanitary Requirements to Imported Quarantine Products" of 30 December 2011, and Government Resolution No. 1396 "On Approval of the Rules on 
Registration Tests and State Registration of Pesticides (Chemical Insecticides) in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 30 November 2011. 
802.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Department of Phytosanitary Safety was in 
charge of strategic planning in the sphere of  phytosanitary safety and developing rules and 
regulations in this area.  The Committee of State Inspection in the Agro-Industrial Complex of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakh stan was in charge of budgeting and conducting 
phytosanitary quarantine control (surveillance) on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
including phytosanitary quarantine border control (surveillance), measures on protection of plants 
from pests, monitoring of agricultural lands ag ainst plant pests and diseases.  In addition, the 
phytosanitary control framework included: (i) State quarantine institutions; (ii) the State 
enterprise "Phytosanitary"; (iii) State inspection branches of oblasts, Astana and Almaty; 
(iv) phytosanitary inspectors of territorial inspections of oblasts, rayons (or cities), Astana and Almaty; and (v) border checkpoints and internal posts of phytosanitary control. The State 
enterprise "Republican Center of Phytosanitary Diagnostics and Prognosis" conducted surveys of 
Kazakhstan's territory to determine the location of an outbreak. State enterprise "Republican Quarantine Laboratory" identified species composition of quarantine pests and diseases.  State enterprise "Republican Plant Introduction Nu rsery of Fruit and Berry Crops" and "Republican 
Plant Introduction Nursery of Field Crops" were in charge of detection of latent infestation of plant 
products (seed and planting stock).  State ente rprise "Phytosanitary" conducted localisation and 
extermination of outbreaks of quarantine pests and diseases.  In reply to additional question, the 
representative of Kazakhstan clarified that state inspection branches of inspections of rayons (or 
cities), oblasts, Astana and Almaty were in charge of: (i) control over phytosanitary conditions of the territory and measures on plant quarantine; (ii)  surveillance of land plots, agricultural lands, 
grain storage and other facilities; (iii) control over organization of fumigation measures; 
(iv) quarantine inspection, sampling for laboratory testing, issuing phytosanitary certificates; (v) control over compliance of entities to phytosanitary rules; and (vi) taking administrative action against natural and juridical persons liable for violation of phytosanitary rules.  Inspectors at the 
border checkpoints and internal posts of phytosanit ary control were in charge of: (i) phytosanitary 
control, inspection, including documentary checks , of imported and exported good subject to 
phytosanitary control as well as goods moving wi thin the territory of Kazakhstan, respectively; 
(ii) issuing orders to cargo owners on conducting necessary plant quarantine measures in 
accordance with legislation in the sphere of plant quarantine; and (iii) taking administrative action against natural  and juridical persons liable for violation of phytosanitary rules.  
803.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
the appropriate level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection was defined as the required level of protection established by a technical regulation for products and phytosanitary requirements to regulated products, produced on the territory of Kazakhstan aimed at prevention of factual 
scientifically grounded risks.  The representative  of Kazakhstan confirmed that the EAEU Treaty, 
EAEU acts, and Kazakhstan's legislation did not and would not in future establish additional SPS requirements for imported products that exceeded the requirements established for the EAEU 
or domestic products.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
804.  The existing list of products under quarantine  (regulated goods) that were subject to 
quarantine phytosanitary control at the customs bo rder of the EAEU and th e territory of the EAEU 
was divided into two groups: (i) quarantine products of high pest risk; and (ii) quarantine products 
of low pest risk.  Classification of quarantine products to high and low pest risks in the list of quarantine products approved by CU Commission Decision No. 318 was based on risk assessment of possible contamination and infestation by quarantine pests, biology and hazard posed by 
quarantine pests, which can spread in certain qu arantine products, conducted by at least one of 
the EAEU member States taking into account In ternational Standards for Phytosanitary Measures 
(ISPM) No. 32.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that imports of quarantine products of 
high pest risk would need to be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate.  No phytosanitary 
certificate was required for imports of regulated products of low pest risk.  The list of quarantine products with their HS codes was included in CU Commission Decision No. 318.  She further 
explained that a number of products were now excluded from the high pest risk list, such as raw 
cane sugar, sugar from sugarbeets, natural sands of all kinds, gravel, sand, fish meal, meat meal WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 191 - 
 
  or meat by-products, protein concentrates, protein-vitamin concentrates and protein pre-mixes. 
The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that pest risk analysis was conducted to determine appropriate level of control for these products.  Th e up-to-date list of goods subject to quarantine 
phytosanitary control was available to the public on the EEC website at 
http://www.eurasiancommission.org/e n/act/texnreg/Pages/acts.aspx.    The representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that products not included in the list of goods subject to phytosanitary 
controls were allowed to enter the EAEU territory without phytosanitary restrictions.   
805.  In line with international practice, when products subject to phytosanitary control were 
imported from countries with registered cases of quarantine spread of quarantine organism in certain areas, imports of products under plant quarantine control were allowed if the products came from pest-free areas, or pest-free places of production or pest-free production sites, 
determined in accordance with ISPMs Nos. 4 and 10 if norms and principles of ISPM No. 20 have 
been applied or if the country of export guarante ed that appropriate measures provided for in the 
Kazakhstan/EAEU legislation to ensure the absence of the quarantine organisms in the exported 
commodity, were carried out.  In cases during phytosanitary control it was detected that regulated 
products subject to phytosanitary control were infected by quarantine organisms, these products could undergo disinfection (decontamination) at the destination points or at the border.  In case, if 
regulated products did not undergo decontamination, they would be destroyed or returned to the 
exporting country.  In cases when the imported regulated products were in some way inconsistent with existing phytosanitary rules and regulations or such products were prohibited for importation into the Republic of Kazakhstan they would be destroyed or returned to the exporting country. 
At the same time, in case quarantine organisms were detected in imported products and the 
exporting country did not take the appropriate measures, Kazakhstan, in accordance with paragraph 6 of Article 7 of the IPPC, reserved  the right to apply emergency (extraordinary) 
phytosanitary measures in order to restrict or ban importation of such products.  
Kazakhstan would notify the relevant Member of application of such measures in accordance with ISPM No. 13.  Any natural or juridical person could appeal the actions (or inactions) of Government 
officials regarding this issue.  
806.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that Kazakhstan would accept replacement 
certificates as foreseen by international guidelin es ISPM No. 12:2011.  In reply, the representative 
of Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan would recognize phytosanitary certificates issued as 
replacement for legitimate phytosanitary certificates provided the national body on quarantine and 
plant protection (hereinafter: the NBQPP) of the exporting country in accordance with ISPM No. 12 
ensured and confirmed the following: (i) phytosanitar y safety of quarantine products; (ii) that prior 
to exporting quarantine products, the NBQPP of the exporting country had carried out sampling, 
inspection and treatment of quarantine products  necessary to comply with the phytosanitary 
requirements of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and (iii) integrity of quarantine products from the 
moment of shipment until importation of quarantine products.  She further noted that EEC Council 
Decision No. 50 of 16 August 2013 approved amendm ents to paragraph 4.1.6 of the "Regulation 
on the Procedure for Quarantine Phytosanitary Control (Surveillance) on the Customs Border of the EAEU" approved by CU Commission Decision No. 318 of 18 June 2010 that provided recognition of 
phytosanitary certificates issued as replacement.   
807.  In reply to a question, the representative of  Kazakhstan clarified that the "appropriate 
information" meant information, presented in the section "Additional declaration" of the 
phytosanitary certificate, confirming that controlled goods were cultivated in the zones and/or 
produced in places free from harmful quarantine organisms as well as information on compliance with other phytosanitary requirements of Kazakhstan. 
808.  A Member of the Working Party asked whether, Kazakhstan accepted imports of regulated 
goods from areas affected by certain quarantine pe sts, provided that certain mitigation measures 
were applied, as provided in relevant IPPC recommendations, and, if this was the case, whether Kazakhstan had defined which mitigation measures it accepted for each combination of pest and 
commodity.  The representative of Kazakhstan repl ied that mitigation measures were acceptable.  
However currently, normative legal acts of Kazakhstan did not define which mitigation measures could be applied in each case.  Kazakhstan confirmed that it was ready to assess mitigation 
measures proposed by exporting countries within a reasonable period of time, as set-out in 
international standards, guidelines and recommendations.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 192 - 
 
  809.  In urgent situations (outbreak) the author ized body, depending on the phytosanitary 
conditions of the exporting country, could introduce provisional restrictions or ban importation of products subject to phytosanitary control.  In such circumstances, the authorized body would provide all pertinent information about its actions to the relevant service of the exporting country.  
Where repeated supply of infected products subject to phytosanitary control had been registered, 
a ban on the importation of the relevant product could be imposed.  She added that contentious issues were normally open for negotiation.   
810.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in certain circumstances, the import 
requirements could include, in cooperation with the national plant protection body (hereinafter: 
NPPB) of the exporting country, an audit in the exporting country by the NPPB of the importing 
country of elements, such as: (i) production system s; (ii) treatments; (iii) inspection procedures; 
(iv) phytosanitary management; (v) accreditation procedures; (iv) testing procedures; and (vii) 
surveillance.  She further stated that such measur es were provided for in ISPM No. 20, paragraph 
5.1.5.1 and thus, they were in line with the IPPC principles and norms.  A Member asked 
Kazakhstan to confirm that audits as described in this paragraph of this Report would be carried 
out only in exceptional cases, and would aim to check the phytosanitary system of the exporting 
country, but would not result in a system of individual approval for export.   
811.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that audit described in paragraph 810 
was intended to reduce the risk of introduction  of quarantine objects to the territory of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  The audit would be conducted to the extent necessary to ensure that the risk of introduction of quarantine objects to the territory of Kazakhstan and the risk of 
non-compliance of regulated products with quarantine rules and regulations was acceptable for the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  In addition, goods subject to phytosanitary control could only be imported through border checkpoints equipped in accordance with Kazakhstan's plant quarantine 
rules and norms.  Kazakhstan confirmed that audits as described in paragraph 810 would be 
carried out only in special cases, for example, when new trade relations were established or there was a problem, and in case of repeated inconsistencies or non-compliance with quarantine 
phytosanitary requirements. 
812.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that when taking phytosanitary measures, 
Kazakhstan's authorities followed the relevant international practice and provisions established in the IPPC and the WTO Agreement on the Applicat ion of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, 
including conducting a risk assessment.  She confirmed that, from the date of accession of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO, if the phytosanitary requirements of Kazakhstan resulted in a higher level of protection than would be achieved by measures based on relevant international standards, 
recommendations or guidelines, Kazakhstan would apply its phytosanitary requirements in 
accordance with the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. She also confirmed that the authorities of Kazakhstan would consult with exporting Members on 
the measures in question, if requested.  Furthermor e, from the date of accession of Kazakhstan to 
the WTO, if phytosanitary requirements applied in Kazakhstan resulted in a higher level of protection than would be achieved by measures based on relevant international standards, recommendations or guidelines, Kazakhstan would provide explanations of the reasons for such 
phytosanitary measure, including the relevant risk assessment, on a bilateral basis following 
receipt of a request from an exporting Member pu rsuant to Article 5.8 of the WTO Agreement on 
the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
813.  Pursuant to Law No. 331-II "On Plant Protection" of 3 July 2002, pesticides had to undergo 
registration and production trials, carried out by research and other organizations of Kazakhstan; 
subsequent registration followed in case of favourab le trial results.  The tests had to be carried out 
under the control of the territorial branches of the Committee of State Inspection in the Agro-Industrial Complex, in accordance with the Rules on Registration Tests and State Registration of Pesticides (Chemical Insecticides) in the Republic of Kazakhstan, approved by the Government 
Resolution No. 1396 of 30 November 2011.  Registration trials were carried out to: (i) determine 
the biological effectiveness of pesticides; and (ii) detect recommended doses and methods of use for production purposes, which were intended for Kazakhstan's soil-climatic conditions and 
cultivated crops. Production trials represented field trials of the recommendations that had been 
elaborated during the registration trials.  Registration and production tests took two to three years. The Ministry of Energy and the Committ ee of Consumer Rights Protection examined 
pesticides subject to registration for the purposes of protection of human health and the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 193 - 
 
  environment. Pesticides included into the Regist er of Potentially Hazardous Chemical Substances 
Prohibited for Use in Kazakhstan could not be registered. 
(f) Protection of Human Health 814.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that CU Commission Decision No. 299 
established the "Common List of Goods Subject to Sanitary-and-Epidemiologic Surveillance 
(Control) at the Customs Border and on the Custom s Territory of the Customs Union" (hereinafter: 
 Common List) (Part I) as last amended by EEC Council Decision No. 36 of 15 June 2012 and 
established food safety requirements for corresponding goods.  Products produced in, or imported 
into the customs territory of the EAEU for distribution to the population, use in industry, agriculture, civil construction development, transp ortation with direct human involvement, or for 
private and household use, had to conform to the CU Commission Decision No. 299 and relevant 
technical regulations.  She further explained that the conformity to the safety requirements groups 
of goods was to be confirmed by a State Registration certificate, as provided for in relevant technical regulation, Commission decisions and domestic law. Goods for which State Registration 
Certificates must be supplied during customs clearance were indicated in relevant technical 
regulation or as provided for in the list of good s subject to the State Registration approved by the 
Commission. 
815.  The Committee of Consumer Rights Protection  was the authorized body responsible for 
issues related to the sanitary and epidemiological welfare  of the population.  The sanitary and 
epidemiological service was a single system consisting of: (i) the authorized body and its border and territorial branches; and (ii) organizations of sanitary and epidemiological services (the 
Republican State Enterprise "Scientific and Practical Center of Sanitary and Epidemiological 
Expertise and Monitoring", State organizations for sanitary and epidemiological expertise).  When developing and approving regulatory acts re lated to the production, importation, turnover, 
use, and destruction of substances/processes that could potentially affect human health, 
Government agencies sought the consent of the authorized body on the sanitary and 
epidemiological welfare of the population.   
816.  In addition to EAEU regulations, the nation al legislation in the sphere of sanitary-
epidemiological safety of population was comprised of the following acts: Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On Public Health and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009, Law No. 301-III "On Food Safety" of 21 July 2007, Govern ment Resolution No. 125 "On Approval of the 
Rules for Assignment of Registration Numbers to Entities Producing Food Products" of 
11 February 2008, Government Resolution No. 2267 "On Approval of the Rules for Refusal for 
Entry, as well as for Production, Use and Sale of Products Intended for Human Consumption, on 
the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as for Use in Business and/or Other Activities" 
of 30 December 2009. 
817.  Members expressed concern that during joint inspections EAEU inspectors requested 
systematic testing results for each lot from all types of exported products, including raw or 
processed, from each visited establishment, prior to  export to the EAEU.  The representative of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan explained that the issue of recognition of monitoring, conducted at the national level and at the level of a food producing establishment, as an equivalent measure of the 
exporting country would be considered during an au dit of the national control system of exporting 
countries.  According to paragraph 48 of EEC Council Decision No. 94, national monitoring programs were taken into account in the assessment of third countries' guarantees. Furthermore, 
according to paragraph 66 of EEC Council Decision No. 94, national monitoring programs were 
taken into account in on-site inspections of exporting establishments.  In reply to specific request of a Member, she explained that the EAEU and national regulations did not contain systematic 
testing requirements for each lot from all types of  exported products.  Paragraph 74 of EEC Council 
Decision No. 94 stipulated that upon arrival at th e establishment of a third country, the inspector, 
inter alia , had to make analysis on existence of official control and application of production 
control, such as Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP), for the purposes of ensuring 
safety of products.  In this case analysis on existence of official control meant that inspectors 
would check whether the establishment was subject to control by competent authorities of the exporting country, such as on-site inspections by the competent authority of the exporting country 
(risk based frequency of such inspections, inspection criteria, results and records of the 
inspections) or state registration of facilities.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that testing of products by food business operators' self-check were accepted.  She further confirmed WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 194 - 
 
  that EAEU inspectors did not request testing in official laboratories for the conformity with 
EAEU requirements.  
818.  Some Members noted that under CU Commission Decisions, the State Registration 
procedure, applied only to certain groups of g o o d s ,  i n c l u d e d  i n  P a r t  I I  o f  t h e  C o m m o n  L i s t  
approved by the CU Commission Decision No. 299.  Members requested information on whether 
domestic provisions still applied, and, if so, what  criteria were used for determining that a product 
was marketed for the first time in the territory of the EAEU or the territory of Kazakhstan. 
819.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that national legal acts were 
applied to the extent that they did not co ntradict CU Commission Decision No. 299 of 
28 May 2010. Such provisions in national law related to the determination of the competent authority, the order of involvement of organi zations and experts in the procedure of State 
Registration, the order of appellation of refusal of  State Registration, and keeping of the national 
part of the Register of State Registration Certificates. Products subject to State Registration were specified in relevant technical regulation or in  CU Commission Decision No. 299.  Thus, only 
products specified in relevant technical regulation or listed in CU Commission Decision No. 299 
were subject to State Registration.  The represen tative of Kazakhstan explained that the State 
Registration procedure applied: 
- if required by relevant technical regulation; or 
- only to certain groups of goods, which were listed in points 1 to 11 of Part II of the Common 
List of Goods Subject to Sanitary and Epidemiological Control, set-out in CU Commission Decision No. 299 (these included: mineral water, bottled drinking water packaged in 
containers, tonic beverages, specialised foodstu ffs, including food products for children, food 
products for pregnant and nursing women, dietary products; biologically active dietary supplements, raw materials for production of biologically active dietary supplements, organic 
products; foodstuffs derived from GMO; GMO; f ood additives, flavourings, technological aids 
including enzymes; and food contact material); 
- only if the goods were covered by HS codes listed in the table of Part II to the Common List 
of Goods Subject to Sanitary Controls (CU Commission Decision No. 299); and 
- if the goods were manufactured for the first time  on the territory of the EAEU or imported 
for the first time into the EAEU territory, and no prior State Registration had occurred, or in cases where the introduction of EAEU requirem ents necessitated the issuance of a new State 
Registration Certificate. 
820.  The representative of Kazakhstan specified that these three cumulative criteria, to 
determine whether a State Registration Certificate was required, were specified in the relevant 
technical regulation or the last paragraph of point 11 in Part II of the Common List of Goods 
Subject to Sanitary and Epidemiological Control.  The following goods were subject to state registration: goods if required by relevant technical regulation or specified in points 1 to 11 of Part 
II of the Common List indicated in HS codes, manu factured for the first time on the EAEU customs 
territory, as well as imported for the first time to the EAEU customs territory. 
821.  The State Registration Certificate was issued for a given type of product and was valid for 
exports from the relevant country without time limitation, provided there had been no violations of 
the regulations during the preceding period.  If th ere were violations found during surveillance at 
the border, the State Registration Certificate could be temporarily revoked. Applications for evaluations were to be submitted to the Committee of Consumer Rights Protection or its territorial 
bodies.  State Registration Certificates were valid throughout the entire territory of the EAEU. 
For domestically produced products, sanitary and epidemiological surveillance was conducted by the territorial authorities of the Committee of Consumer Rights Protection at the stage of 
distribution of products on Kazakhstan's domestic market.  In response to questions from a 
Member of the Working Party, the representative of  Kazakhstan stated that the State Registration 
Certificates for domestic products were also issued for a given type of product and were valid for an unlimited time period.  In her view, the re spective procedures and requirements did not 
discriminate between domestic and imported products. The process for issuing a State Registration 
Certificate could not exceed 30 days after an application was received.  If the application was rejected, the Committee of Consumer Rights Protection sent a letter to the applicant explaining 
what needed to be changed.  After corrections were made, the applicant could re-submit the 
application. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 195 - 
 
  822.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, since 1 July 2010, a State Registration 
Certificate was issued in accordance with the relevant technical regulations or the common EAEU form required for products specified in paragraph 819 and was valid throughout the customs territory of the EAEU.  The certificate confirmed that the controlled goods conformed to 
EAEU Common sanitary and epidemiologic and hygienic  requirements.  The period of validity of the 
State Registration Certificate covered the whole pe riod of manufacture or delivery of controlled 
goods to the territory of the EAEU.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the 
State Registration Certificate was harmonized among the EAEU member States and that each 
member State recognized the right of other member States to issue this certificate and that a State Registration Certificate would be valid throughout the territory of the EAEU. 
823.  In response to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the term 
"new products" meant products developed and industrially manufactured for the first time on the 
territory of Kazakhstan and also products imported into the territory of Kazakhstan for the first time, i.e., which had not been on sale in Kazakhstan before.  The absence of a prior State 
Registration indicated that the product was new to the market of Kazakhstan and State 
Registration was required.  She also explained that the producer, supplier, or importer could submit an application for State Registration of products. 
824.  Some Members noted that points 1 to 11 of Part II of the Common List of Goods Subject to 
Sanitary and Epidemiological Control included non-food products, such as disinfectants, cosmetics or hazardous chemical substances.  The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that CU Commission Decision No. 299 covered the protection of human he alth in general from risks derived from both 
food and non-food products. 
825.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that some commodities were also subject to 
mandatory confirmation of conformity to EAEU requirements.  The list of such commodities, which 
also contained references to quality standards and quality requirements for these products, was 
approved by CU Commission Decision  No. 620 of 7 April 2011 which had replaced the list in CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010, and in cluded the following fo od and feedstuffs: (i) 
canned food products (fish, caviar, seafood); (ii)  fat-free dry milk; and (iii) feeds for animals, 
including formula feeds, pre-mixes, protein feed additives, such as oilseeds meal and cake, fish meal, protein-vitamin additives, dry milk for feeding and dry milk replacements.  Until 1 January 2011, confirmation of conformity fo r these food products had been carried out in 
accordance with national legislation of each EAEU member State.  From 1 January 2011, the 
declaration of conformity was provided upon assessment by the certification bodies and testing laboratories (centres) included into the Single Register of Certification Bodies and Testing 
Laboratories (Centres) of the EAEU.  With regard to feedstuffs, from 1 July 2010, self-declaration 
of conformity could be made on the basis of  an assessment provided by the producer.  
Foreign manufacturers and/or suppliers, located outside the territory of the EAEU, could apply for 
a certificate/declaration of conformity that was issued in accordance with national legislation of an 
EAEU member State or for an EAEU certificate of  conformity or declaration of conformity of a 
common EAEU form, as approved by CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010, as amended by EEC Collegium Decision No. 226 of 13 November 2012.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan further explained that references to quality standards and quality requirements with 
regard to products on the List of Commodities Subject to Mandatory Confirmation of Conformity 
would be revised as the EAEU member States ad opted EAEU technical regulations on specific 
products. 
826.  She further noted that pursuant to the Regulation of Conduct of State 
Sanitary-Epidemiological Control adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 299, food products 
included into Part II of the Common List and produced or imported in the EAEU territory had to be 
accompanied with a document confirming safety of the products, i.e. State Registration Certificate, issued upon results of testing conducted by the laboratories included into the Common List of Certification Bodies and Laboratories of the EAEU. Such testing had to be conducted by exporters 
for the purposes of compliance with the Commo n Sanitary Epidemiological Requirements.  
Food products included in Part I of the Common List but not included in Part II of the Common List, and produced or imported into the EAEU, had to be accompanied with a document of producer 
(or its authorized supplier) certifying the safety of products.  The representative of Kazakhstan, 
however, noted that these requirements were app lied as an interim system of safety control of 
food products which would gradually be replaced with the requirements of technical regulations for 
respective food products.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 196 - 
 
  (g) Compliance of the SPS Regime with Specific Provisions of the 
WTO SPS Agreement 
- (i) Harmonization with International Standards and Norms  827.  Some Members sought assurances that, pursuant to CU Commission Decision No. 721, in 
cases where a WTO Member officially notified an EAEU member State that an SPS requirement in 
force on the EAEU territory was more stringent than the relevant international standard, this international standard was immediately applied unless and until such time that a risk assessment, 
done in accordance with international standards, was provided. 
828.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members of the Working Party that the 
CU Commission had adopted Decision No. 625 "On En suring of Harmonization of Legal Acts of the 
Customs Union in the Sphere of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures with 
International Standards" of 7 April 2011 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 625), as 
amended by CU Commission Decisions No. 722 of 22 June 2011 and No. 11 of 7 March 2012.  According to the Decision, EAEU SPS measures that, after examination, were recognized as more 
stringent than international standards, without scientific justification for such restriction or risk to 
human, animal or plant life or health would be brought into conformity with international standards.  She noted that foreign governments co uld bring measures to the attention of the EAEU 
member States and participate in the examination.  
829.  The representative of Kazakhstan further info rmed Members of the Working Party that in 
connection with implementation of CU Commissi on Decision No. 625, EEC Collegium Decision 
No. 212 of 6 November 2012 approved the "Regulat ion on the Uniform Procedure of Carrying Out 
Examination of Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Implementation of Sanitary, 
Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures", which ha d replaced CU Commission Decision No. 801 of 
23 September 2011.  Some Members of the Wo rking Party expressed concern that the 
implementation procedure was unnecessarily burdensome and lengthy.   
830.  The representative of Kazakhstan confir med that the EAEU would apply MRLs on 
chlorothalonil, clofentezine, cyprodinil, kresoxim -methyl, iprodione, propamocarb, pirimicarb, 
thiabendazole, carbendazim, famoxadone, copp er compounds, and lambda cyhalothrin that 
corresponded to international standards in conformity with the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures no later than the date of the accession of Kazakhstan, and that these MRLs would be set out in EAEU acts.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
831.  A Member of the Working Party noted that the harmonization process for MRLs of 
veterinary drugs should also include elimination of zero-tolerance or very low tolerance in food of veterinary substances when these substances are authorized for use in Kazakhstan/EAEU under 
similar conditions to those in place in exporting countries, notably similar length of withdrawal 
periods.  The Member further asked to clarify how withdrawal periods had been set in Kazakhstan, how it was ensured that those withdrawal periods enabled achieving the very strict MRLs 
applicable for some antimicrobial substances and asked if these withdrawal periods allowing to 
reach the required EAEU MRL for preparations co ntaining tetracyclines could be communicated to 
requesting Members.  The Member sought confir mation that OIE recommendations for marketing 
authorization had been followed and that the MRL used in studies submitted at the time of 
granting the marketing authorization by Kazakh veterinary authorities was the same as the MRL 
recently set by EAEU norms.   
832.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that zero-tolerance or very low tolerance of 
veterinary drug residues in food had been estab lished based on a risk assessment. Authorization of 
use of such veterinary drugs in Kazakhstan did not mean that MRLs established for these veterinary substances could not be respected. Authorization of use of veterinary drugs in the 
territory of Kazakhstan was established taking into account the period of withdrawal of the 
substances from the animal.  Moreover, accumulation of these drugs in specific organs and tissues, wherein the minimum residue levels were allowed, was also taken into account.  The package of documents submitted by the applicant for registra tion of veterinary drugs and feed additives 
contained information about the period during which the drug was eliminated from the body 
completely, or reduced to a level corresponding to the MRLs established for these drugs by the 
EAEU legislation.  This information was confirmed by scientific research.  The period of withdrawal WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 197 - 
 
  of the drug from the body was checked during  the approbation research conducted by the 
competent authority.  The representative of Ka zakhstan further noted that withdrawal periods 
allowing to reach the required EAEU MRL for prepar ations containing tetracycline ranged from 7 to 
15 days.  Kazakhstan had allowed the use of antibiotics in feed, but only in accordance with the 
instruction accompanying the particular veterinary drug.  She further confirmed that Kazakhstan 
had been following OIE recommendations for marketing authorization.   
833.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that certain standards for some veterinary 
drugs had been harmonized with international standards by the CU Commission Decision No. 889 
of 9 December 2011.  Currently, the results of th e previous risk assessments were being revisited 
within the framework of the works on harmonization of MRLs for remaining veterinary drugs.  The results of the risk assessment carried out by  an EAEU member State were published on the 
official websites of the national competent bodies.  The harmonization of remaining MRLs for 
veterinary drugs was currently in process and would be completed by the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, unless application of an MRL that was not based on an international 
standard was justified under the WTO Agreement on  the Application of Sani tary and Phytosanitary 
Measures.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.   
834.  As regards maximum levels for contaminants, the representative of Kazakhstan informed 
Members that maximum levels for nitrates in lettuce and cadmium in poppy seeds had been 
reviewed and revised in accordance with international recommendations and set-out in amendments to the Unified Sanitary and Epidemiological Requirements set out in CU Commission Decision No. 299.   
835.  Furthermore, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that as of the date of the 
accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO, the maximum levels of nitrates would be revised in accordance with international standards, recommendations, and guidelines.  The Working Party 
took note of this commitment. 
836.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that radio nuclide levels and microbiological 
standards were being revised in accordance with international recommendations.  The proposals 
would be transmitted to the EEC in due course to avoid inconsistency with international standards 
by the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO.   
837.  Some Members expressed concerns about EAEU MRLs for tetracyclines that were much 
more stringent than international standards and no justification for these stringent requirements in 
the form of a risk assessment and scientific justification consistent with international standards 
and recommendations had been provided.  These Members requested that Kazakhstan and other EAEU member States apply the Codex standards for MRLs for tetracyclines.  These Members noted 
that some form of risk assessment had been pu blished at http://fcrisk.ru/node/652.  They had 
expressed concern regarding the timing and proc edures followed and had commented that this 
assessment was not conducted in accordance with international standards.  Members of the 
Working Party noted that the harmonization process for MRLs of veterinary drugs should also 
include elimination of non-tolerance or very low tolerance in food of veterinary substances when these substances are authorized in use in the EAEU  under similar conditions to those in place in 
exporting countries.  Finally, these Members recalled CU Commission Decision No. 625 
"On Ensuring of Harmonization of Legal Acts of  the Customs Union in the Sphere of Sanitary, 
Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures with In ternational Standards" of 7 April 2011 and CU 
Commission Decision No. 721 of 22 June 2011 and requested that Kazakhstan fully implement 
these Decisions. 
838.  The representative of the Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan, before the date of its 
accession to the WTO, would provide to any interested Member scientific evidence and an 
assessment of the risk associated with tetracyclines antibiotics residues, developed in accordance 
with methods of scientific evaluation set by the Codex Alimentarius, sufficient to justify the application of MRLs more stringent than those provided for in the relevant Codex standards.  If such a scientific justification and risk assessment for a more stringent MRL was not provided, the 
MRLs for tetracyclines would be revised to correspond to Codex standards in national and EAEU 
acts as of the date of the accession of Kazakhstan  to the WTO consistent with the provisions of the 
WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  The Working Party 
took note of this commitment. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 198 - 
 
  839.  In response to a question from a Member, th e representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
Kazakhstan had conducted a risk assessment for MRLs on tetracycline in accordance with international standards.  The conclu sion was published at http://www.npc-
ses.kz/index.php?option=com_content&view=art icle&id=940%3Amaterials-for-human-health-risk-
assessment-of-tetracycline-intake-with-food&c atid=35%3A2010-11-19-10-11-22&lang=ru.  
840.  One Member requested Kazakhstan to confirm that, in application of Article 3.1 of the 
WTO SPS Agreement, Kazakhstan would review al l of its existing sanitary and phytosanitary 
measures to ensure that, by the date of accession, they were based on international standards, 
guidelines and recommendations or, in the event that Kazakhstan or the EAEU considered that 
international standards did not meet its appropriat e level of protection, they were scientifically 
justified in accordance with Article 3.3 of the WTO SPS Agreement.  In cases where relevant 
scientific evidence was insufficient, this Member requested that Kazakhstan confirm that it would 
comply with Article 5.7 of the WTO SPS Agreement. 
841.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, as of the date of accession, in 
application of Article 3.1 of the WTO Agreement on  the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures, all sanitary and phytosanitary measures, whether adopted by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be based on international standards, guidelines or 
recommendations as provided for in the WTO Agreement.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that, in cases in which no mandatory veterinary or phytosanitary, or sanitary epidemiological and hygienic requirements had been established at EAEU or Kazakhstan national level, Kazakhstan would apply the relevant standards, guidelines or recommendations, or parts 
thereof, of the OIE, IPPC and Codex respectively .  Further, the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that measures which were not based on international standards, guidelines and recommendations, where they exist, would not be applied in Kazakhstan without providing 
Members a scientifically based justification of the measures, in accordance with the WTO 
Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Ph ytosanitary Measures, including Article 3.3.  
In cases where relevant scientific evidence was insufficient, she confirmed that any measure 
adopted, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU would comply with the WTO 
Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytos anitary Measures, in particular with Article 5.7 
thereof.  In the event that international standards were not considered to meet the appropriate level of protection, Kazakhstan would provide scientific justification for measures applied in 
Kazakhstan, in accordance with Article 5.8 of th e WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary 
and Phytosanitary Measures.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that this obligation currently was included in the EAEU legal framework, and Kazakhstan further would ensure that 
these obligations continue to be a mandatory part of the EAEU legal framework in the future.  The 
Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- (ii) Risk Assessment 
842.  With regard to risk assessments, some Memb ers emphasized the need, in conformity with 
the WTO SPS Agreement, to comply with international standards, recommendations and guidelines for conducting and reviewing risk assessments.  They noted the relevance and applicability of Codex standards: CAC/GL-62-2007-Working Principl es for Risk Analysis for Food Safety for 
Application by Governments and CAC/GL/30-1999-Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of 
Microbiological Risk Assessments, and the FAO document; and WHO-EHC-240.5-Principles and Methods for the Risk Assessment of Chemicals In Food, Chapter 2 - Risk Assessment and its Role 
in Risk Analysis.  In the view of these Members, a risk assessment should be limited to an 
examination of the measure already in place or favoured by the importing country.  It should not be distorted by pre-conceived views on the nature and the content of the measure to be taken, nor 
should it develop into an exercise tailored to and carried out for the purpose of justifying decisions 
ex post facto . 
843.  In the view of these Members, the conduct of a risk assessment, whether for a biological, 
chemical, or physical food safety hazard, was one part of a broader effort to describe the relevance 
and understanding of scientific-based decisions.  The analysis of risk allowed regulatory officials to 
focus finite resources on those hazards that posed the greatest risk to human health protection.  Risk assessment provided a framework for evaluating food safety hazards relevant to the national 
context, predicting the likelihood of exposure to those hazards, and estimating the resulting public 
health impact associated with a wide variety of variables.  Experts involved in risk assessment, including government officials and subject matte r experts from outside government must be WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 199 - 
 
  objective in their scientific work and not be subject to any conflict of interest that may compromise 
the integrity of the assessment.  These experts should be selected in a transparent manner on the basis of their expertise and their independence with regard to the interests involved, including disclosure of conflicts of interest in connection with risk assessment.  Elements of an effective 
assessment and analysis of that assessment needed to include a public process for seeking input 
on the design of the risk assessment, documentat ion of those decisions, and then ensuring that 
the public has access to the documentation.  A peer review process whereby subject matter 
experts provide critical analysis of the design features and the assumption made was 
recommended.  Such contributions through the peer review and public process could improve transparency, increase the quality of the analysis, and facilitate risk communication by increasing 
the credibility and acceptance of the results.  There needed to be a formal record of all decisions 
associated with the risk assessment and which woul d be made available to interested independent 
parties so that other risk assessors could repeat and critique the work.  The formal record and summary should indicate any constraints, uncertainties, assumptions, and their impact on the risk 
assessment.  Members expressed concerns that certain norms and certain SPS measures applied 
to imports into the EAEU territory and into the Republic of Kazakhstan were not in line with international standards, guidelines and recommendations, and were not based on a risk 
assessment carried out based on the internationally recognized principles and recommendations 
described above.  These Members sought assurances from Kazakhstan that these internationally recognised principles and recommendations would be used in conducting risk assessments for SPS measures applicable to imports into the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
844.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that principles and recommendation 
developed by the relevant international organizations described in paragraph 842 and 843 were used in conducting risk assessment for SPS measures applicable to imports in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the CU Commission had 
adopted Decision No. 835 "On Equivalence of Sanita ry, Veterinary, or Phytosanitary Measures and 
Conduct of Risk Assessment" of 18 October 2011 (h ereinafter: Decision on Equivalence and Risk 
Assessment).  Under this Decision, EAEU member Stat es were required, consistent with Article 5 of 
the WTO SPS Agreement, to ensure that sanitary, veterinary, or phytosanitary measures were based on an assessment, as appropriate to the ci rcumstances, of the risks to human, animal or 
plant life or health, taking into account risk assessment techniques developed by the relevant 
international organizations, including Codex, OIE, and the IPPC.  She further explained that the 
EAEU requirements for conducting risk assessments corresponded to the provisions of Article 5 of the WTO SPS Agreement, including a requiremen t that, as provided in Article 5.3 of the 
WTO SPS Agreement, in assessing the risk to animal or plant life or health and determining the 
measure to be applied for achieving the appropriate level of sanitary, veterinary or phytosanitary protection from such risk, the EAEU member States would take into account as relevant economic 
factors:  the potential damage in terms of loss of production or sales in the event of the entry, 
establishment or spread of a pest or disease, the costs of control or eradication in the territory of 
the member States, and the relative cost-effectivene ss of alternative approaches to limiting risks.  
845.  Some Members of the Working Party noted the requirement that applied to certain goods 
on the Common List of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control that imports come from 
establishments on the Registry, as described in paragraph 732.  These Members expressed concern that applying this requirement to certai n of the products on the Common List of Goods 
Subject to Veterinary Control was not based on science or a risk assessment.  In addition, there 
could also be a requirement for an establishment to be included in the Register prior to being permitted to export products to the territory of the EAEU where a veterinary certificate, import 
permit and State Registration which appeared to be more trade restrictive than required to achieve 
the appropriate level of protection of the EAEU. Moreover, these Members recalled their concerns about the absence of risk assessments and science  to justify measures maintained by the EAEU 
and Kazakhstan that were more stringent than international standards, guidelines, and 
recommendations. 
846.  In response to the request of a Member to  provide information on the risk assessment 
bodies involved in evaluation of risk, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan listed the following 
institutions: WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 200 - 
 
  1) in the sphere of veterinary: 
- Kazakh Scientific Research Veterinary Institute; 
- Republican Veterinary Laboratory; 
- National Reference Center in Veterinary; 
- KazAgroInnovation; and 
- Scientific Research Institute for Biological Safety Problems. 
2) in the sphere of phytosanitary: 
- Kazakh Scientific Institute of Plant Protection and Quarantine; 
- Republican Plant Quarantine Laboratory; 
- Republican Methodological Center of Phytosanitary Diagnostics and Prognosis; and 
- State Enterprise "Phytosanitary". 
3) in the sphere of food safety: 
- National Scientific and Practical Centre of Sanitary and Epidemiological Expertise and 
Monitoring; 
- Kazakh Food Academy; and 
- Kazakh Scientific Center for Hygiene and Epidemiology . 
847.  A Member asked for confirmation that risk assessment is carried out prior to the 
introduction of a restriction on imports into the EAEU/Kazakhstan and that Kazakhstan/the EAEU 
will provide this risk assessment to the exporting country affected by the restrictions upon request.  
In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article 56 of the EAEU Treaty, SPS measures were developed and app lied on the basis of scientific justification and 
only to the extent necessary to protect human, animal and plant life and health.  Pursuant to 
paragraph 2 of Article 26-1 of Law "On Veterinary", veterinary measures had to be based on scientific justification, objective risk assessment or  international standards.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that risk assessment was conducted prior to implementation of introduction 
of restriction to imports and would provide the results of risk assessment upon request of exporting country, as provided for in the WTO Agreement. 
848.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, as of the date of accession of 
Kazakhstan, goods would be included on the Common  List of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control 
only if application of veterinary measures was in compliance with international standards, guidelines and recommendations, or if science or risk assessment justified, consistent with the 
WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, subjecting a category 
of goods to veterinary measures.  Similarly, the veterinary measures applied to each category of goods would also be in compliance with international standards, recommendations and guidelines 
or based on science or risk assessment.  Furtherm ore, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed 
that Kazakhstan would remove products from the List of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control by the date of its accession to the WTO, if the rete ntion of goods on the list was not in compliance 
with international standards, guidelines and recommendations, or not justified by science or risk 
assessment, consistent with the WTO Agreement on  the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures.  Moreover, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that consistent with the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, that risk assessments 
would be conducted taking into account the risk assessment techniques developed by the relevant 
international organizations and their subsidiary bodies.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.  
849.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, as of the date of its accession to the 
WTO, in accordance with the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures, EAEU and Kazakh SPS measures would be based on an assessment, as appropriate to the circumstances, of the risk to human, animal or plant life or health, taking into account risk 
assessment techniques developed by the relevant international organizations.  She further 
confirmed that in accordance with the WTO Ag reement on the Application of Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures, these assessments would  take into account the standards guidelines and 
recommendations of Codex, OIE and IPPC, in part icular: Codex Guidelines on Working Principles 
for Risk Analysis for Food Safety for Applicat ion by Governments (CAC/GL 62-2007); chapter 2.1 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 201 - 
 
  on Import Risk Analysis of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code; chapter 2.2 on Import Risk 
Analysis of the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Code; International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) No. 2 "Framework for Pest Risk Analysis", ISPMs Nos. 11, 21; and, the categories of commodities according to their pest risk established by ISPM No. 32. The Working Party took 
note of these commitments.  
- (iii) Regionalization 850.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  Kazakh officials widely used the principle 
of regionalization, as defined in the WTO SPS Agreement, when deciding to take a measure.  
The Common Veterinary Requirements (each chapter) adopted by the CU Commission Decision No. 317 of 18 June 2010 stipulated that the regionalization principle was recognized.  The procedures for carrying out regionalization in th e sphere of applying veterinary measures were 
in accordance with the OIE Code (Chapter 4.3. OIE, 2011). Kazakh legislation in the plant 
quarantine sphere was based on IPPC provisions and international standards on phytosanitary measures.  Accordingly, regionalization applied to  all imported regulated products.  Phytosanitary 
certificates were issued in the exporting country  by agencies of the official National Plant 
Protection Organization.  Regional characteristics were a factor for the purposes of devising phytosanitary measures for use in a particular region. 
851.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that procedures for carrying out regionalization in 
the sphere of applying veterinary measures were in accordance with the OIE Code.  The compliance of veterinary measures with OIE standards was accomplished through the Common Veterinary Requirements and Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002. 
852.  She further stated that the principle of regionalization was applied in full accordance with 
provisions of IPPC and ISPM Nos. 1, 4, 10, 14, an d 29.  This had to be respected, including in the 
formulation of veterinary and phytosanitary certificates. 
- (iv) Equivalence 
853.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at the appropriate level of protection was 
determined by the EAEU bodies with regard to sanitary and veterinary measures and by each 
EAEU member State on the national level with regard to phytosanitary measures, and were 
reflected in technical regulations for products prod uced on the territory of the EAEU and individual 
EAEU member States, respectively.  Furthermore, the representative recalled that the CU Commission had adopted Decision No. 835  "On Equivalence and Risk Assessment" of 
18 October 2011 (hereinafter: CU Commission Decision No. 835), which provided:  
- for EAEU member States to recognize equivalence if an exporting country objectively 
demonstrated that its measures achieved the appropriate level of sanitary or veterinary 
protection of the EAEU or the appropriate level of phytosanitary protection of an individual 
EAEU member State;  
- the procedure to follow as regards consultations with the exporting country(s) and relevant 
information to be provided by the exporting country(s);  
- procedural and substantive requirements as regards the judgement on recognition of 
equivalence; and 
- the possibility of inspection, testing or audi t in the exporting country(s) upon a request by 
the EAEU member States.   
854.  In addition, under CU Commission Decision No. 835, EAEU member States committed to 
apply the same approach to requests for national recognition of equivalence in the phytosanitary 
field addressed to individual EAEU member Stat es.  She also noted that the CU Commission 
Decision No. 835 provided for the possibility fo r exporting countries to request equivalence 
recognition by the EAEU or its member States (depending on respective competences) of their 
control or inspection systems.  She explained that CU Commission Decision No. 835, and 
procedures necessary to apply this Decision had been adopted by EEC Collegium Decision No. 17 of 11 February 2014.  The representative of Kaza khstan stated that, the CU Commission Decision 
No. 835 foresaw the following procedure: WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 202 - 
 
  - submission of a request for equivalence recognition to a competent authority of an EAEU 
member State, including, inter alia , information on the type and scope of equivalence 
agreement requested, description of product(s), measure(s) or system(s) of control and inspections concerned, an evaluation of how the measure(s) or system(s) of the exporting 
country achieved the appropriate level of protection of the EAEU or an EAEU member State, 
and information on the feasibility and performance of the measure(s); 
- interactions between the EAEU member State and the exporting country in the context of 
the determination of equivalence; 
- prior to taking a decision on equivalence, the EAEU member State would, upon request, 
provide to the requesting exporting country an  explanation of the EAEU's or its level of 
protection; and 
- notification by the Commission or an EAEU member State to the exporting country of its 
judgement as regards recognition of equivalence in a timely manner and with appropriate explanation where it was found that the measure was not equivalent. 
855.  Furthermore, the representative of Kazakhstan specified that, in applying CU Commission 
Decision No. 835, the EAEU member States would follow international standards, guidelines and 
recommendations developed by the relevant international organizations, including the Codex 
Alimentarius Commission, the International Office of Epizootics and the relevant international and 
regional organizations operating within the framework of the International Plant Protection Convention.  Members noted that, as set out in the Decision of the WTO SPS Committee (G/SPS/19/Rev.2), the importing Member had certain responsibilities: to provide an explanation of 
the objective and rationale of the sanitary or phytosanitary measure and identify clearly the risks 
that the relevant measure intended to address.  Moreover, the importing Member should indicate the appropriate level of protection which its sanitary or phytosanitary measure was designed to 
achieve and should provide a copy of the risk as sessment on which the sanitary or phytosanitary 
measure was based.  As stated in the WTO SPS Committee Decision, an importing Member was to consider the relevant information and experience that the sanitary and phytosanitary services had 
on the measure(s) for which recognition of equivalence was requested.  A key element for 
consideration was the historic knowledge and co nfidence that the competent authority of the 
importing Member had of the competent authority of the exporting Member.   
856.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan, from the date of its 
accession to the WTO, would ensure compliance with Article 4 of the WTO Agreement on the 
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  She further confirmed that, as provided for in Article 4 of the WTO Agreement on the Applicat ion of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, 
sanitary, veterinary, and phytosanitary measures of other Members, even when they were 
different from measures of Kazakhstan or the EAEU, would be accepted as equivalent, if the 
exporting country objectively demonstrated that its measures achieved the appropriate level of 
SPS protection applied in Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that, as of 
the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO,  procedures for recognition and determination of 
equivalence, consistent with the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, including Article 4 thereof, whether app lied by Kazakhstan or competent bodies of the 
EAEU, would be based on relevant international standards, guidelines and recommendations, 
namely the Decision of the WTO Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (G/SPS/19/Rev.2), Codex Guidelines on the Judgment of Equivalence of Sanitary Measures 
Associated with Food Inspection and Certification Systems (CAC/GL 53-2003), Codex Guidelines 
for the Development of Equivalence Agreements Regarding Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems (CAC/GL 34-1999); Chapter 5.3 of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code 
"OIE Procedures Relevant to the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures of the World Trade Organization" and International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) No. 24 "Guidelines for the Determination and Recognition of Equivalence of Phytosanitary Measures".  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- (v) Non-discrimination 
857.  Some Members also requested clarification of whether SPS measures applied in 
Kazakhstan established similar treatment for domestic and foreign like products.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, in her view, non-discriminatory treatment was 
provided by the current legislation of Kazakhstan and EAEU Agreements, Commission Decisions, and other EAEU Acts.  EAEU Agreements, Commiss ion Decisions and other EAEU Acts did not set-
out separate SPS measures for imported goods.   Sanitary-epidemiological, veterinary and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 203 - 
 
  phytosanitary rules, criteria, measures and requirements were applied uniformly and without 
discrimination to all foreign, EAEU, and domestic products and suppliers.  She stated that SPS requirements were implemented with respect to goods originating from foreign countries in the same way, they were applied in respect of similar products of Kazakh origin.  EAEU Agreements, 
Commission Decisions, and other EAEU Acts, as well as the current legislation of Kazakhstan in the 
veterinary/sanitary sphere (Article 23 of Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002) were uniform and established identical requirements for both foreign, EAEU, and domestic goods and 
manufacturers, including requirements for putting products on the domestic market.  
Finally, phytosanitary requirements applied to regulated products originating from a foreign country in the same manner as they applied to the same regulated products of Kazakh origin. 
858.  The non-discrimination principle was ensure d in paragraphs 127, 142 and 153 of EEC 
Council Decision No. 94  stipulating the same requirements to the laboratory testing of imported 
and domestic products. 
859.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all SPS measures developed and applied 
in Kazakhstan, whether by Kazakhstan or competent bodies of the EAEU, would comply with the 
non-discrimination provisions of the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, including those relating to the principles of national and most-favoured-
nation treatment.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
(h) Transparency, Notification and Enquiry Point Obligations 
860.  With regard to the transparency requirements of the SPS Agreement, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that a single TBT/SPS enquiry point had been in operation since July 2005.  
The enquiry point notified WTO Members of SPS measures in effect, as well as on measures that 
were still in preparation.  The enquiry point, upon receipt of notifications from the WTO Secretariat, EurAsEC member State, EAEU member States and other international 
organizations, published them quarterly in the offi cial publication of the authorized body (Bulletin 
of the Enquiry Point) and monthly in the common information system (http://www.memst.kz/en/services/tbtsfs.php or ht tp://wto.memst.kz/en/tbtsfs/reg). Notifications 
would be prepared in accordance with the "Rules and Procedures for Preparation of Notifications on 
Pending (Being Adopted) Technical Regulations and Standards". These rules had been developed in line with the notification provisions of th e WTO SPS and TBT Agreements and ensured that 
notifications took place at an early stage when comments could be taken into account and prior to 
the adoption and enforcement of these proposed  regulations.  The enquiry point could be 
contacted at: 
Address: Orynbor st., 11 
  010000 Astana 
  Republic of Kazakhstan 
Telephone: +(771) 7222 6482 
Tel/fax:  +(771) 7220 5640 
E-mail:  enquirypoint@mail.ru Website: http://wto.memst.kz/en  
861.  A Working Party Member asked the representative of Kazakhstan to clarify as to whether 
the phrase "get familiar with intention" in paragraph 2.3 of the Rules of Completion and 
Submission of WTO Notifications included the opportunity to comment.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that in general, the scope of th e Rules is only the methodology of filing of SPS 
notifications.  The possibility to comment was provided in Government Resolution No. 718 "On the 
Rules on Creation and Functioning of the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS" of 11 July 2005, as last 
amended in September 2010.  In particular, pa ragraph 11 of the Rules on the Enquiry Point 
provided that the Enquiry Point, upon reques t of the WTO Secretariat, EurAsEC members and 
other international organizations had to present information (clarifications), standards, conformity assessment procedures, and other SPS measures.  
862.  This Member, with regard to provision 2.8 and the Order included in the Annexes, noted 
that the Order was very similar to the notification  format used for notifications under the WTO SPS 
and TBT Agreements; however, there were some differences.  For instance, the Order did not WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 204 - 
 
  include a section for the comment deadline.  In this regard, this Member enquired why Kazakhstan 
developed its own format instead of using the formats developed by the WTO SPS and TBT Committees.  In reply, the representative of Ka zakhstan said that the mentioned notification 
format was related to notifications on emergency measures in technical regulations, SPS 
measures, or amendments to them.  The purpose of  such notifications was to inform interested 
WTO Members about urgent measures, implemented in order to protect human and animal life and health, ensure plant and/or environment protecti on. She emphasised that emergency notification 
forms developed by the WTO SPS and TBT Committees do not have a section for comment 
deadline.  The regular notification format – also included in Annex 1 of the Rules of Completion and Submission – contained the section for the comment deadline.  
863.  As regards emergency measures, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
Kazakhstan would comply with point 6 of Annex B to the WTO SPS Agreement.  
864.  This Member commented that with regards to the operation of the Enquiry Point, one of 
the issues discussed by WTO Members in the WTO SPS Committee was the importance of inter-
agency coordination.  The Enquiry Point for bo th SPS and TBT was established in the Committee 
on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry  of Investments and Development .  In this 
regard, this Working Party Member asked how the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology would coordinate with other agenci es involved in developing SPS measures.  
865.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the SPS/TBT Enquiry Point had been 
established by Government Resolution No. 718 of 11 July 2005, which authorized the Enquiry Point to coordinate with the Ministry of Agriculture an d the Committee of Consumer Rights Protection on 
the issues of SPS notifications, including respon ding comments from WTO Members.  Pursuant to 
this Resolution, Government agencies (including the Ministry of Agriculture and the Committee of Consumer Rights Protection) provided appropriate information to the enquiry point within two days 
after the adoption and application of TBT and SPS measures in order to send such information to 
the WTO Secretariat, EurAsEC member States, EAEU member States and other international 
organizations.   
866.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to describe in details the steps that would take place for SPS 
notification of draft EEC texts, both for the notification and for the consideration of the comments received.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that Kazakhstan would notify WTO Members on EEC SPS measures once the firs t draft of the SPS document was approved by 
the working group and then by the Consultative Committee for public consultation. 
Thus, Kazakhstan's SPS/TBT Enquiry Point would send notification to the WTO approximately at the same time when the draft SPS document would be published for public consultation by the 
EEC.  This would allow EAEU member States to  synchronize the process of receiving comments 
through both mechanisms.  Moreover, after Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, its enquiry point would coordinate the notification process with the Russian Federation's notification authority in 
order to ensure that similar dates for comments were established for the notifications of the same 
draft document.  She clarified that the 60 days co mment period through WTO notification would be 
provided even if the EEC public comment period was closed.  The contact point for sending feedback to the notified EEC document would be indi cated in the notification and it could be either 
the SPS/TBT enquiry point, or the EEC, or bo th.  The SPS/TBT Enquiry Point would forward 
comments and proposals received from WTO Members to the relevant authorized body of Kazakhstan, which, in turn, would forward them to the EEC.  She further explained that the 
received comments and proposals would be cons idered at the EEC working group meeting. 
In accordance with EEC Collegium Decision No. 31 "On Ensuring Transparency in the Process of Adoption of Acts of the Eurasian Economic Commi ssion in the Sphere of Application of Sanitary, 
Quarantine Phytosanitary and Veterinary-Sanitary Measures" of 5 March 2013, the Department of 
the Sanitary, Phytosanitary and Veterinary Measures of the Commission, within 30 days after expiration of the public consultation period, had to compile a summary table of comments received under the public consultation and under the WTO SPS notification channels, and compile the 
answers to these comments, and publish the summary table on the official EEC website.  
In addition, the enquiry point would provide answ ers to WTO Member's comments provided in the 
context of the SPS notifications. 
867.  She added that, pursuant to Government Resolution No. 1627 of 30 October 2000, the 
Ministry of Agriculture had established an Inform ation Marketing System to enhance transparency 
through regular exchange of analytical marketing information between agricultural producers, WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 205 - 
 
  public bodies, and other participants on the agricultural market; and through enhanced interaction 
with international organizations.  All relevant drafts, amended and final SPS and (agriculture-related) TBT regulations and rules were available from the Ministry's website, http://mgov.kz/napravleniya-razvitiya/information-for-third-countries as well as from 
http://www.memst.kz/en/pb.  All in terested parties could send questions and comments to the 
Ministry at office@minagri.gov.kz.  The enquiry point also published a quarterly bulletin of all draft 
amended and final SPS measures.  The Ministry of Agriculture issued an analytical bulletin 
"Agroinform", which contained all legal acts, approved by the Ministry of Agriculture, including 
legislation on veterinary, quarantine and plant protection.  In addition, the State sanitary and epidemiological control system maintained a regularly updated database on the incidence of infectious diseases and on the results of random laboratory tests of drinking water and food 
products.  This information was available to all interested parties.   
868.  In response to a question from a Member re garding the existence of a process for public 
participation in the development of rules and regulations, she said that Law No. 124-III 
"On Private Entrepreneurship" of 31 January 2006 provided for the participation of the private 
sector in the development of regulatory acts that would affect the interests of private entrepreneurs.  In her view, the provisions of this Law ensured that the public could put forward 
proposals for the consideration of the relevant authorized body. Besides, in accordance with the 
above-mentioned Law, a draft law had to be examined by accredited Business Associations.  In response to specific questions, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan's legislation contained no restrictions on foreign participation in the development of sanitary and 
phytosanitary standards (e.g., participation in technical committees meetings, providing 
comments).  Proposals and comments should be submitted through the enquiry point.  Furthermore, EEC Collegium Decision No. 161 of 18 September 2012, which had replaced CU 
Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010, as amended by CU Commission Decision No. 625 
of 7 April 2011, provided for publication of EAEU draft SPS measures with a public comment period of at least 60 days. Within this period, any interested party could submit its comments on the 
drafts.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that according to Article 8 of the Annex 
to EEC Council Decision No. 48 of 20 June 2012, which set out a procedure for the development, 
adoption, amendment and repealing of technica l regulations of the EAEU, draft technical 
regulations must be published on the EEC website and should be available for public consultation 
for at least two months.  Comments received from interested parties would then be taken into 
account to amend the draft technical regulations. 
869.  Members noted that many comments on draft technical regulations had been provided to 
the EAEU member States and institutions through the public consultation mechanism.  Members 
were concerned that few of the submitted comments had resulted in modifications to the final adopted technical regulations, even in cases where the comments noted discrepancies with 
international standards or suggested alternative approaches more aligned with the international 
standards and facilitating trade.  These Member s therefore sought assurances that meaningful 
consideration would be given to comments and that the mechanisms provided by CU Commission Decision No. 625 for aligning with international standards would be fully implemented. 
870.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that EEC Council Decision No. 48 had approved a 
new Regulation on Development, Adoption, Amending  and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of 
the Customs Union.  Pursuant to the Decision, a table of comments and proposals resulting from 
public consultation with corresponding answers was published on the EAEU official website.  
EEC Collegium Decision No. 31 of 5 March 2013 provided for similar procedures for SPS measures, namely, the publication of a summary table of  comments and answers on the EAEU official 
website.  She further clarified that the mechanism of aligning EAEU SPS measures with 
international standards provided by CU Commission Decision No. 625, had been established in EEC Collegium Decision No. 212 "On Regulation on th e Uniform Procedure of Carrying Out Examination 
of Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere  of Implementation of Sanitary, Veterinary and 
Phytosanitary Measures" of 6 November 2012, which had replaced CU Commission Decision 
No. 801 of 23 September 2011. 
871.  In reply to a Members' question, Kazakhstan confirmed that it would follow the WTO SPS 
Committee's "Recommended Procedures for Implementing the Transparency Obligations of the 
SPS Agreement" (G/SPS/7/Rev.3). WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 206 - 
 
  872.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would ensure that draft 
SPS measures applicable to imports into Kazakhstan would be notified to the WTO Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, including EA EU SPS measures, in accordance with Annex B 
of the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sani tary and Phytosanitary Measures and following 
the principles of the WTO SPS Committee's "Recommended Procedures for Implementing the 
Transparency Obligations of the SPS Agreement" (G/SPS/7/Rev.3).  SPS measures, including those relating to inspection, were published in publications, such as those mentioned in paragraph 867. 
Information on all proposed SPS measures and thos e in effect, as foreseen in Annex B of the WTO 
Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phyt osanitary Measures, could also be obtained from 
the SPS notification authority or from Kazakhstan's SPS enquiry point.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.   
(i) Proportionality, Nece ssity, and Reasonableness 
873.  Some Members of the Working Party expressed concern that SPS measures applied by 
Kazakhstan and other EAEU member States to exports to Kazakhstan were not always 
proportionate to the risk identified.  These Members gave the following examples of measures that 
were disproportionate or otherwise inconsistent with international rules:   
- the list of goods subject to veterinary control included goods that did not represent a 
veterinary or sanitary risk which would justify submitting these goods to requirements for 
listing establishments on the Common Register, State Registration, import permits, and veterinary certificate requirements;  
- imposition of trade restrictive measures, such as suspension of establishments or 
mandatory pre-export testing, were not reviewed and eliminated after food safety 
standards had been harmonized with international standards or when steps had been taken to address food safety issues;  
- inspectors requesting exporting establishments to show the results of monitoring of 
residues of veterinary medicinal products in processed products in addition to the monitoring carried out on the raw materials;  
- EAEU member States not using residue monitoring plans as a tool to manage the risk of 
exposure, as foreseen in Codex guidelines, but requesting pre-export tests;  
- EAEU member States requesting systematic inspections of plant nurseries before allowing 
export to Kazakhstan of plants for planting, in  absence of a basis foreseen by the IPPC to 
have such preliminary inspection; and  
- overly detailed and unnecessary requirements of inspectors during inspections.   
These Members recalled that the principles of pr oportionality, necessity and reasonableness were 
enshrined in a number of Articles of the WTO SPS Ag reement, such as Articles 2.1, 2.2, 5.3, 5.4, 
5.6 and Annex C thereof, and that, in their view, Kazakhstan should also modify its practices to 
make them more proportionate to the risks and reasonable.   
874.  In response to these concerns, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all 
SPS measures, whether adopted by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be applied in conformity with the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  In particular these SPS measures would be applied only to the extent necessary to 
protect human, animal or plant life or health and would be not more trade restrictive than required 
to achieve the appropriate level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection of the EAEU and Kazakhstan.  Finally, when determining the appropriate level of sanitary, veterinary, or 
phytosanitary protection, Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would take into 
account the objective to minimize negative trade effects in accordance with the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
(j) Conclusion 875.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that, from the date of accession of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO, all SPS measures would be developed, whether by Kazakhstan or the 
competent bodies of the EAEU, and applied in Ka zakhstan in accordance with the WTO Agreement 
and in particular, the WTO Agreement on the Applic ation of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  
In particular, SPS measures would be applied only to the extent necessary to protect human, WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 207 - 
 
  animal, or plant life or health; would be based on  scientific principles and, where they exist, on 
international standards, guidelines, and recommendations; and, would not be more trade restrictive than required to achieve the appropri ate level of protection applied in Kazakhstan. 
SPS measures would not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate between Members where identical 
or similar conditions prevail, including between the territory of Kazakhstan and that of other 
Members.  SPS measures would not be applied in a manner, which would constitute a disguised restriction on international trade, and would not be maintained without sufficient scientific 
evidence, except as provided for in Article 5. 7 of the WTO Agreement on the Application of 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Trade-Related Investment Measures 876.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan applied local content 
requirements, in the form of preferences for purcha se of locally produced goods, with a view to 
diversifying the national economy.  In addition to local content requirements described in Sections "State Ownership, State-Trading Entities and Priv atization" and "Government Procurement" of this 
Report, pursuant to Kazakhstan's legislation, local content requirements were applied in 
procurement of goods and services
16 by subsurface users within the framework of investment 
contracts in the oil and gas, and mining sectors and under investment agreements in the 
automotive sector.  TRIMs described in this Section and the local content requirements in 
procurement by State-owned enterprises and by national managing holdings, national holdings, national companies, and joint stock companies (JSCs) or limited liability companies (LLPs) with 50% or more of State participation were the only local content requirements on goods enforced in 
law in Kazakhstan, except for those applied by the Government in its procurement for immediate 
or ultimate consumption in governmental use and not otherwise for resale or use in the production of goods for sale. 
- TRIMs in the Oil and Gas and Mining Sectors 
877.  In the oil and gas and mining sectors, the requirement for local content was regulated by 
Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010 (hereinafter: Law "On 
Subsurface and Subsurface Use"), which had replaced Law No. 2828 "On Subsurface and 
Subsurface Use" of 27 January 1996.  Pursuant to Article 69 of Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use", subsurface use contracts were concluded for a period determined in the project documentation for carrying out extraction works and contained provisions for the possibility to 
extend their term.  These contracts were required by  Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" to 
contain commitments for subsurface users to use domestically produced goods provided that they met the requirements of project documentation and legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
technical regulation.  Amendments to signed contracts were subject to negotiations between the 
authorized body and the subsurface user, and co uld be introduced on the basis of consensus 
between the parties.   
878.  In accordance with Article 77 of Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use", the purchase of 
goods for conducting subsurface operations could be  carried out by one of the following methods:  
(i) open tender; (ii) price offer request; (iii) from a single source; (iv) through the electronic procurement system; or, (v) through commodity ex changes.  Article 78 of Law "On Subsurface 
and Subsurface Use" stipulated a local content requirement and established that, when identifying 
an open tender winner, the tender organizer had to  conditionally reduce by 20% the price of goods 
produced in Kazakhstan. 
879.  In implementation of Article 16 of Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use", Kazakhstan 
adopted the new "Rules for Procurement of Goods and Services in Performance of Subsurface Use 
Operations", approved by Government Resolution No. 134 of 14 February 2013 (hereinafter in this 
Section: Rules), which had replaced Government Resolution No. 1139 "On Approval of Rules of 
Procurement of Goods, Works and Services in Performance of Subsurface Use Operations" of 
28 November 2007.  The main changes introduced by the Rules were related to the procurement 
procedures in oil and gas sector, where subsurface users were required to conduct all purchases of 
goods and services in electronic format.  According to the Rules, subsurface users placed tender 
                                               
16 The term "services" includes both services and work as those terms are used in Law No. 291-IV "On 
Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 208 - 
 
  documentation on the State information system – the Register of Goods and Services Used in 
Subsurface Operations and their Producers (hereinafter in this Section: Register).  This provision allowed potential suppliers to receive the tender documentation on-line, free of charge, including technical specifications of goods and services.  Ho wever, at this stage, subsurface users in the 
mining sector could use the Register only for purchases of goods and services via the currently 
applied electronic procurement method.  
880.  The Rules also introduced certain changes in the provisions related to the local content 
requirement.  In order to fulfill contractual local content commitments in open tender (or price 
offer request), the Rules stipulated the right of su bsurface users to include requirements on local 
content in goods and services into the tender documentation, expressed as a percentage (from 0 to 100) in each lot.  Under the Rules, an open tender was held in two stages:  (i) pre-
qualification of potential suppliers; and, (ii) determination of the tender winner.  At the first stage, 
a tender commission examined whether proposed goods and services complied with technical requirements of tender documentation, including examination as to whether potential suppliers fell 
under categories of "local producer of goods" or "l ocal producer of services".  At the second stage, 
the tender commission determined the winner of the tender on the basis of the lowest price bids.  Local producers of goods and services were gran ted 20% conditional price discount.  In addition, 
the Rules clarified provisions on procedure of determining winner of open tender in case price bids 
were equal.  For example, in case price bids of (i) several local producers after application of 20% conditional price discount, or, (ii) several producers, who did not comply to the conditional price discount, were equal, the winner was determined on  the basis of the highest percentage of local 
content in offered goods and services. 
881.  The Rules expanded the list of cases when procurement could be conducted from a single 
source.  Procurement from a single source, as compared to open tenders which were more time 
consuming and lasted at least 30 days, required less time and allowed subsurface users to conduct 
procurement of goods and services without delay in subsurface use operations.  In particular, in accordance with sub-paragraph 37 of paragraph 94 of the Rules, subsurface users in the mining 
sector could purchase goods and services directly from a local producer of goods and services who 
was the sole supplier registered in the database of local goods, services and suppliers thereof, maintained by the Ministry of Investments and Development.  Under sub-paragraph 37 of paragraph 272 of the Rules, subsurface users in th e oil and gas sector could apply this method for 
purchase of goods if the local content in goods being purchased constituted not less than 65%.  
In addition, procurement from a single source could be conducted in the following cases: (i) purchase of research and development (R&D) from local producers provided that the local content 
in those services was not less than 65%; and (ii) purchase of educational services by subsurface 
users in the oil and gas sector from local educational institutions in order to fulfill the contractual commitments on education of Kazakhstan's citizens employed in the course of performing 
subsurface use contracts.  
882.  The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that local content in goods was defined as a 
percentage value of domestic materials and inputs used in the value of finished goods produced on 
the territory of Kazakhstan
17.  The local origin of goods was verified with certificate "CT-KZ" issued 
by the Chamber of Commerce of Kazakhstan.  For example, in 2012, the share of local content in 
the total value of goods procured by subsurface users within the framework of investment contracts was 12.6%
18.  Tender procedures had to take place in Kazakhstan.  Both national and 
foreign investors were equally entitled to participate in the bidding process.  In her view, such 
provisions were non-discriminatory and introduced an opportunity for imported goods.  However, not all subsurface users were fully compliant with their contractual obligations on local content 
requirement, which could result in penalties or term ination of contracts.  In 2012, subsurface users 
in oil and gas sector were charged US$500,000, of which they paid US$8,000. 
                                               
17 The goods of Kazakhstan's origin were determined  according to Government Resolution No. 793 “On 
Approval of Rules of Determining the Country of Origin  of Goods, Execution, Confirmation and Issuance of 
Certificate on Origin of Goods and Repeal of Certai n Decisions of the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan” of 16 July 2014.  
18 In 2012, the total procurement of goods made by subsurface users was equal to 758.3 billion tenge, 
including goods of Kazakhstan's origin in  the amount of 95.2 billion tenge. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 209 - 
 
  883.  In response to a question on the changes introduced by Law "On Subsurface and 
Subsurface Use" , the representative of Kazakhstan said that this Law, inter alia,  incorporated all 
the provisions on local content requirements contained in Law No. 2828 "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 27 January 1996.  She further added that Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface 
Use" provided clarification on the definitions of local content in goods, services and workforce.  
Particularly, two new terms had been introduced:  (i) a Register of Goods and Services Used in Subsurface Operations and their Producers, which was the State information system established to 
control and monitor the purchase of goods and serv ices used in subsurface operations and their 
producers, and, (ii) a uniform methodology for calculation of local content by organizations procuring goods and services, which was the procedure approved by the Government of Kazakhstan.  According to Article 76 of Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use", a subsurface 
user was required to submit an annual procurem ent programme and report on goods and services 
purchased for implementation of the investment contract.  
884.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that amendments made to Law "On Subsurface 
and Subsurface Use" in January 2012 further clarified the existing requirement for research and 
development (R&D) funding by a subsurface user  with the purpose to develop knowledge-based 
industries producing high value-added goods and services.  She further clarified that according to 
the amendments:  (i) a subsurface user's annual funding of R&D would not be less than 1% of 
aggregate annual income within the contractual activity; and, (ii) funding would be channelled to Kazakhstan's producers of goods and services.  
885.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan's economy was dominated by the 
production of hydrocarbon and mineral resources, an d the oil sector was the most attractive sector 
for both foreign and local investors.  Forecasts sh owed that the volume of foreign investments in 
oil production was continuously increasing, while other sectors of the economy remained 
underdeveloped.  Hence, her Government had introduced the local content requirement to 
encourage the use of domestically produced goods in order to:  (i) ensure the rational restructuring of subsurface use; (ii) achieve sustainable economic development through economic 
diversification and reduction of the economy's high dependence on volatile world prices for exports 
of mineral resources; and, (iii) create an envi ronment conducive to development of processing 
industries and production of high value-added goods.  She emphasized the importance of the 
diversification programme for Kazakhstan's economy, and added that creating a favourable climate 
for development of processing industries was a priority for her Government. 
886.  She added that during the period of economic adversity in the early 1990s, in order to 
attract foreign direct investments and to develop Kazakhstan's unexplored oil fields, her 
Government had signed long-term (up to 40 years) investment contracts with major multinational 
oil companies, on terms which granted VAT and cu stoms duty exemptions for imported goods used 
in oil operations.  Since the terms of signed contracts could not be changed retroactively 
(i.e., pursuant to a contract stability clause), the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the 
provisions of Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" were aimed at offsetting the discriminatory effects of those earlier investment contracts which created a disadvantage for domestically produced goods, which remained subject to the payment of VAT. 
887.  Upon request of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan said that in accordance with 
Article 50 of Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use", the tender offers for obtaining rights to use subsurface for exploration, extraction, combined exploration and extraction, inter alia , had to 
contain the following proposals:  (i) local content in purchasing goods and services required for 
implementation of the contract; (ii) obligations regarding local content in personnel, which had to increase to the extent of implementation of traini ng thereof; and, (iii) obligations on education of 
Kazakhstani personnel.  All these provisions had to be included into the subsurface use contracts. 
888.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, local content provisions were established 
individually in each subsurface use contract depending on the specifics of the goods required for its implementation.  Currently, there were 565 co ntracts signed between the Government of 
Kazakhstan and subsurface users:  203 of whic h on crude hydrocarbons and 362 in the mining 
sector.  Of 203 contracts on crude hydrocarbons, 94 would expire by 2020 and 109 in the period from 2021 to 2053.  Of 362 contracts in the mining sector, 144 would expire by 2020 and 218 in 
the period from 2021 to 2060.  She further added that, of 203 contracts on crude hydrocarbons, 
193 contained numerical local content commitments set in percentage and 10 contained textual local content commitments.  Of 362 contracts in the mining sector, 351 contained numerical WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 210 - 
 
  commitments set in percentage and 11 contained textual local content commitments.  The typical 
textual commitment on local content in subsurface use contracts was the following:  "To use equipment, materials and goods produced in the Re public of Kazakhstan provided that they meet 
the requirements of the project documentation and legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan".  
The typical numerical commitment text on local content was the following:  "Size of the local 
content under the contract each fiscal year shall no t be less than (...) % with respect to goods, not 
less than (...) % with respect to works and not less than (...) % with respect to services in 
conducting operations on subsurface". 
889.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to explain how all WTO-inconsistent measures applied under 
investment contracts under the provisions of Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" would cease to be enforced and whether the future amendment to Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface 
Use" would make only the WTO-inconsistent parts of measures of the contracts ineffective.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kaza khstan requested a transitional period starting 
from the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO to phase-out WTO-inconsistent measures 
applied in existing subsurface use contracts under the provisions of Law "On Subsurface and 
Subsurface Use".  These measures would cease to be enforced through:  (i) introduction of the amendments to Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" aimed at removing measures 
inconsistent with the WTO TRIMs Agreement with regard to procurement of goods in new 
contracts; and, (ii) signing supplementary agreements with subsurface users, which would remove from investment contracts WTO TRIMs Agreement-inconsistent measures with regard to procurement of goods and replace them with WTO TRIMs Agreement-consistent measures by the 
date of expiration of the transitional period
 starting from the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO.  Contracts that expired prior to the termination of the transitional period would not be renewed containing measures inconsistent with the WTO TRIMs Agreement.   
- TRIMs in the Automotive Sector 
890.  Regarding the automotive sector, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal 
basis for preferential tariffs or tariff exemptions for imports of parts and components used for 
assembling motor vehicles and parts and components thereof under "industrial assembly" regime 
was established by the Common External Tariff (CET),  as approved by the Decision of the EurAsEC 
Inter-State Council No. 18 "On Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan  and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 
and put into effect through CU Commission Decision No. 130 "On Common Customs Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 27 November 2009 and in the relevant national legislation. 
891.  In Kazakhstan, industrial assembly agreements were concluded in accordance with the 
"Rules on Concluding the Agreement on Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles", approved by Order of the Deputy Prime Minister - Minister of Industry and New Te chnologies No. 113 of 11 June 2010 
(hereinafter: Order No. 113).  According to these rules, industrial assembly of motor vehicles 
meant a system of serial production based on technological processes providing for project production capacity under two-shift operation of no less than 25,000 pieces per year and featuring the following technical operations: 
- welding, assembly and painting of the body; 
- installation of cabin equipment; - installation of a power train, steering mechanism and exhaust system; 
- installation of electrical equipment and suspension components; 
- installation of exterior elements; and - conducting control tests of finished motor vehicles. 
892.  Juridical persons that signed an agreement on industrial assembly qualified for preferential 
tariffs (from 0% to 5%) on the import of parts and components used in the assembly of automobiles under tariff lines of the CET "For the Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles under Headings 8701-8705, their Components and Assemblies" provided they met the following 
conditions: 
(1) to have productive assets of at least 2 billi on tenge as of the agreement signing date; and, WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 211 - 
 
  (2) to have an obligation in a period not exceeding 84 months from the signing date of the 
agreement: 
 - to launch the industrial assembly of at least one model of the motor vehicles of 
 HS heading 8703; 
- to import car parts originating from countries not party to the EAEU under the 
tariff lines of the CET "For the Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles under Headings 8701-8705, their Components and Assemblies" in volume of no more 
than 70% of the total value of the auto-c omponents used in the production, taking 
into account the cost of the body, being classified in HS heading 8707. 
893.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in the automotive sector in accordance with 
Order No. 113, to date, four companies had concluded agreements on industrial assembly with the 
Ministry of Investments and Development. Thes e companies were:  JSC "AgromashHolding", LLP 
"SaryarkaAvtoProm", JSC "AziaAvto" and JSC "Azi aAvto Kazakhstan".  The agreements with JSC 
"AgromashHolding", LLP "SaryarkaAvtoProm" an d JSC "AziaAvto" had been signed in 2010 and 
with JSC "AziaAvto Kazakhstan" in 2012 for a term of 8 years with the possibility of further 
extension.  In response to a Member's question, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
Order No. 113 provided only the assembly of automobiles under HS headings 8701-8705.  In 
response to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the industrial 
assemblies of Peugeot and Toyota automobiles ha d been launched under the existing industrial 
assembly agreements with JSC "AgromashHoldi ng" and LLP "SaryarkaAvtoProm", respectively, 
which would expire on 1 July 2018. 
894.  Some Members considered that the requirement to use domestically produced products 
was inconsistent with the WTO TRIMs Agreement.  These Members added that this requirement also appeared to constitute prohibited expo rt subsidies under Article 3.1 of the WTO SCM 
Agreement.  These Members asked Kazakhstan to  explain how it intended to bring existing 
legislation and existing contracts into conformity with WTO requirements.  These Members sought a commitment from Kazakhstan that, from the date of WTO accession, it would not maintain 
measures that would be in conflict with the WTO TRIMs Agreement nor enforce contract provisions 
that contained such measures. 
895.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in accordance with the EAEU Treaty, 
starting from 1 January 2015, Kazakhstan woul d not include local content requirements in 
procurement of goods in new contracts with subsurface users.  Therefore, in parallel with the 
ratification of the EAEU Treaty, the Government planned to initiate the amendment to Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" that would remove the local content provision with regard to 
procurement of goods in contracts on subsurface use signed from 1 January 2015.  She further 
emphasized that taking into account the importance of the application of the local content requirements for diversification of the economy in investment contracts concluded prior to 
1 January 2015 in accordance with Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" and industrial 
assembly agreements concluded under the provisions of Order No. 113, a transitional period was required to phase-out these measures.  
896.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of its accession to the 
WTO, Kazakhstan would ensure that all laws, regulations and other measures applied in 
Kazakhstan that were within the scope of th e WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Investment 
Measures, whether adopted by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be 
consistent with the relevant provisions of th e WTO Agreement, including the WTO Agreement on 
Trade-Related Investment Measures, except for measures applied under investment contracts 
concluded prior to 1 January 2015 in accordance with Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and 
Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010, and industrial assembly agreements referred to in paragraph 
893 under the provisions of Order of the Deputy Prime Minister – Minister of Industry and New 
Technologies No. 113 "On Certain Issues on Concluding, Conditions and Model Form of the Agreement on Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles  with Legal Entities - Residents of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 11 June 2010.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that from 
1 January 2015, Kazakhstan would not include in any new investment contracts or industrial assembly agreements concluded with investors in any sector, or include or maintain in the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 212 - 
 
  renewal19 of any existing investment contracts or industrial assembly agreements, provisions that 
are inconsistent with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
897.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent measures applied 
under investment contracts concluded prior to 1 January 2015 in accordance with Law No. 291-IV 
"On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010 would cease to be enforced as of the date of expiration of the initial duration of the contracts or by 1 January 2021, whichever takes place 
sooner.  She further confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent measures applied in accordance with 
industrial assembly agreements concluded under the provisions of Order of the Deputy Prime 
Minister – Minister of Industry and New Technologies No. 113 "On Certain Issues on Concluding, Conditions and Model Form of the Agreement on Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles with Legal 
Entities - Residents of the Republic of Kazakhst an" of 11 June 2010 referred to in paragraph 893  
would be eliminated by 1 July 2018.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that with respect to the measures applied under the industrial assembly agreements pursuant to Order of the 
Deputy Prime Minister – Minister of Industry and New Technologies No. 113 "On Certain Issues on 
Concluding, Conditions and Model Form of the Agreement on Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles with Legal Entities - Residents of the Republic  of Kazakhstan" of 11 June 2010 as listed in 
paragraph 893 and under the investment contracts pursuant to Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface 
and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010 concluded prior to 1 January 2015, Kazakhstan would engage in consultations with interested WTO Members no later than 1 July 2016 and 1 January 2019, respectively, regarding WTO consistent measures that could be applied, and 
notify WTO Members of any measures planned to replace WTO-inconsistent measures at least six 
months prior to the adoption of any new measures.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Free Zones, Special Economic Areas 
898.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the establishment of Special Economic Zones 
(SEZs) was aimed primarily at attracting foreign direct investments; accelerating development of 
modern high technology industries, transport infrastructure, and tourism; increasing employment; 
and other purposes as defined in the legal document s establishing individual SEZs.  In Kazakhstan, 
Law No. 469-IV "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 21 July 2011 (hereinafter: 2011 Law "On SEZs") had replaced Law No. 274-III "On Special Economic Zones in 
the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 6 July 2007 (hereinafter: 2007 Law "On SEZs").  The 2011 Law "On 
SEZs" had invalidated the previous Law and now wa s the basic Law on SEZs.  Additional relevant 
provisions were contained in Code No. 269-IV "On Customs Issues in the Republic of Kazakhstan" 
of  30 June 2010 (hereinafter: Customs Code of Kazakhstan) and Code of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV 
"On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 (hereinafter: Tax Code).  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that, within the 
EAEU, SEZs were regulated by Article 27 "Esta blishment and Functioning of Free (Special) 
Economic Zones and Free Warehouses" of the EAEU Treaty, which came into effect on 1 January 2015, and the Agreement on Free (Special) Economic Zones on the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and the Customs Procedures  of the Free Customs Zones of 18 June 2010 
(hereafter: CU Agreement on SEZs) which remained in force, as well as by the Treaty on the 
Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 Nove mber 2009 (hereinafter: CU Customs Code) and 
other legal instruments.  She continued that from 1 January 2015, these provisions of the EAEU 
Treaty and the CU Agreement on SEZs provided the general framework within the EAEU for rules 
on establishment and operation of new SEZs, and application of provisions of the Agreement to existing SEZs, including provisions on customs regime of the free customs zone on the territory of 
SEZs. 
899.  Working Party Members requested further information on the current rules of 
establishment and operation of the SEZs established and administered under Kazakhstan's new Law on SEZs, as well as information to help them assess whether the zones met 
WTO requirements.  Members also sought information about the relationship between 
Kazakhstan's 2011 Law "On SEZs" and the provisions of the CU Agreement on SEZs which had entered into force on 1 July 2010.  Information was also requested on current status of the 
six SEZs previously established under 2007 Law "On SEZs", and whether they were now operated 
                                               
19 The term "renewal" refers to extension of the duration of existing contracts. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 213 - 
 
  in accordance with the current legislation.  Working Party Members also asked for details on how 
WTO obligations would be enforced in all the SEZs operating on the territory of Kazakhstan after accession, in particular whether Articles I and III of the GATT 1994 would be applied, and whether incentives granted to firms established in the SEZs  would be based on export performance or local 
content requirements.  Other issues raised by Members in this connection concerned the need to 
restore any tariffs or taxes from goods or inputs imported from non-EAEU member States used in the manufacturing process in the SEZs to goods eventually exported to the rest of Kazakhstan or 
the territory of other EAEU member States, even if imported inputs had been transformed 
sufficiently to meet the criteria as domestic goods.  One Member stated that, in its view, there was no level of transformation sufficient to eliminate the need to restore exempted duties and taxes on inputs imported from non-EAEU member States into the SEZs duty- and tax-free, as rules of origin 
operated between countries, not parts of countries.  Other Members sought information on what 
other benefits, if any, in terms of tax exemptions or otherwise, were available to firms that located in the SEZs.   
- (a) EAEU Regulation of SEZs 
900.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, as previously stated, the SEZs established in 
Kazakhstan under the national 2011 Law "On SEZs" conformed to EAEU requirements for SEZs as 
well, including those set-out in the CU Agreement on SEZs and the CU Customs Code.  
This Agreement and the CU Customs Code provid ed the general framework within the EAEU for 
SEZs, but left specific regulations on their operation, establishment, management, extension, early termination, types of SEZs, and types of activiti es allowed in SEZs to be determined by the 
national legislation of the EAEU member States.  In many cases, the EAEU and national regimes 
worked together to establish the specific elements of the EAEU regime for SEZs.  For example, while national laws provided for the registration of residents of the SEZs and national authorities 
would maintain a national register of such resi dents, however, the CU Agreement provided that 
the EAEU member States were required to send  the information on SEZ operations and their 
national  registers of residents to the Commission, which in turn created and published a common 
EAEU register of residents.  The Commission had the right to decide what economic activities and 
operations could be prohibited within SEZs in  addition to those prohibited by each EAEU 
member State in its SEZs.   
901.  In response to Members' questions, the repres entative of Kazakhstan also explained that 
according to Article 1 of the CU Agreement on SEZs, a free (special) economic zone was defined as 
a part of the territory of the EAEU member State within the boundaries determined by the legislation of the EAEU member State, where a special (special legal) regime for entrepreneurial 
and other activities was in effect, and customs regime of free customs zone could be applied.  
The CU Agreement on SEZs also confirmed that the territories of SEZs were zones under customs control and that customs regime of free customs zone as defined by the CU Customs Code and the 
CU Agreement on SEZs was applied to goods placed in SEZs.  She explained that the customs 
authorities of Kazakhstan were responsible for customs control in SEZs according to the national legislation.  
902.  Prior to the enactment of the CU Agreement on SEZs, foreign and Kazakhstani goods had 
entered the territory of SEZs without obtaining a permission from the customs authorities.  
Such goods were only subject to regular customs clearance procedures when entering the customs 
regime of the free customs zone.  Currently, according to the CU Agreement on SEZs, goods could 
be imported into and exported from the SEZ te rritory only with the permission of customs 
a u t h o r i t i e s .   I n  r e s p o n s e  t o  a  M e m b e r ' s  q u e s tion about the legislation that described the 
procedures for issuing permits, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the Customs Control 
Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan had developed a draft Resolution "On Some Issues of 
Application of the Customs Procedure of Free Customs Zone", which established procedures for issuing permits for the importation and exportation of goods into/from the territory of SEZ, as well as forms for these documents.  According to the draft Resolution, for obtaining a permit for 
importation of goods into the SEZ territory, SEZ residents submitted to the customs authorities 
copies of commercial, transport (shipping) or customs documents in respect of imported goods that contained information required for customs control of goods and vehicles.  Based on 
verification of the documents against the actual data, the customs authorities made a decision on 
the import of the goods and the means of transportation to the SEZ. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 214 - 
 
  903.  Pursuant to Article 10 of the CU Agreement on SEZs, a "free customs zone" regime was 
defined as the customs procedure within SEZ borders, under which foreign goods were placed and used within the territory of a SEZ or its part without paying customs duties and taxes and were not subject to non-tariff regulation; goods of the EAEU  were placed and used within the territory of a 
SEZ or its part without application of bans and restrictions to them. 
904.  Article 10 of the CU Agreement on SEZs also provided that goods that incorporated 
imported inputs and were manufactured by SEZ residents registered prior to 1 January 2012, 
could be recognized as EAEU goods up until 1 January 2017, i.e., they could be sold into the rest 
of the customs territory of the EAEU without pa ying the exempted customs duties on imported 
inputs, provided such imported inputs had been substantially transformed, i.e., they met any of 
the following conditions listed in Article 19 of the CU Agreement on SEZs:  
(i) manufacturing had changed the HS classifica tion code of the good at the level of  
any of the first four digits;  
(ii) its transformation was recognized as sufficiently implementing a pre-determined 
list of conditions, production and technological or manufacturing operations, 
necessary to be recognized as goods of the EAEU; and, 
(iii) the percentage share of the value added had reached a pre-determined share of 
the price of the final good (the rule of ad valorem  share) or the percentage share 
of the cost of foreign goods did not exceed a pre-determined share.  
905.  The Commission had the right to decide by consensus:  (i) the list of conditions and 
operations for goods manufactured in SEZs, incorp orating imported goods that were, or were not, 
sufficient for these goods to be recognized as good s of the EAEU, and, (ii) the procedure for using 
the rule of ad valorem  share as a criterion of sufficient processing for these goods to be recognized 
as goods of the EAEU.  The rule of ad valorem  share could not be applied to repairs of the goods of 
the EAEU done in the SEZs.  Goods would not be recognized as EAEU goods, if the transforming 
operations applied, did not meet the criteria for sufficient processing established by the Commission.  The national authority, as defined by national legislation, carried out the 
determination of the status of the goods in acco rdance with the rules of the CU Agreement on 
SEZs, issued the relevant legal findings and enforced them.  In case of Kazakhstan, this national authority was the Ministry of Investments and Development. 
906.  In response to a Member's request to clarify what were the pre-determined shares used as 
a sufficient processing criterion, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that an ad valorem  share 
rule was established by CU Commission Decision No. 515 "On the Order of Use of Ad Valorem Share Rule as Criterion of Sufficient Processing of Goods Produced (Obtained) with the Use of 
Foreign Goods Placed under Customs Procedure of  Free Customs Zones or Customs Procedure of 
Free Warehouse" of 18 November 2010.  According to this Decision, goods produced with the use of foreign goods placed under the customs procedure of free customs zone or a free warehouse 
customs procedure were considered as sufficiently processed if the percentage share of the cost of 
foreign goods used in the manufacture of the fina l product did not exceed 50% of the price of the 
final product.  The cost of foreign goods placed under the customs procedure of free customs zone or free warehouse customs procedure, and used in  the manufacturing of the final product, was 
determined as a the customs value of such goods,  established on the date the customs authorities 
registered the customs declaration filed for pl acing goods under the customs procedure of free 
customs zone or free warehouse customs procedure.  The price of the final product was 
determined on ex-works conditions.  She further added that, currently, Kazakhstan applied 
national sufficient processing criteria establis hed by Government Resolution No. 793 "On Approval 
of Rules of Determining the Country of Origin of Goods, Execution, Confirmation and Issuance of 
Certificate on Origin of Goods and Repeal of Certain Decisions of the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 2014.  
907.  She stated that Article 17 of the CU Agreement on SEZs established procedures for 
payment of customs duties and taxes applied to goods exported from the territories of SEZs.  
In particular, goods of the EAEU exported from SE Zs into the rest of the EAEU customs territory 
were not subject to payment of customs duties, including export duties.  Goods of the EAEU 
exported from SEZs to locations outside of the EAEU customs territory were subject to payment of 
export customs duties, if applicable.  When calculating export duty, the duty rate itself, value of 
goods and/or the physical characteristics of in-kind (number, mass, volume or other 
characteristics), as well as the quantity of goods and the exchange rate, established in accordance WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 215 - 
 
  with the legislation of the EAEU member State, were determined on the day of registration by 
customs authorities of the customs declaration, submitted for placing goods under customs regime 
of export.  As for foreign goods, they were subj ect to payment of import customs duties and VAT 
when exported from SEZs into the rest of the EAEU customs territory.  When foreign goods were 
exported from SEZs to locations outside of the EA EU customs territory export duties and VAT were 
not levied.  She further stated that goods produced (processed) in the SEZs by residents registered prior to 1 January 2012 incorporating imported components, but recognized as goods of 
the EAEU based on sufficient processing criteria, i.e., substantial transformation, were not subject 
to payment of customs duties when exported fr om SEZs into the rest of the EAEU customs 
territory.  These latter provisions expired on 1 January 2017. 
- (b) Basic Law on SEZs 
908.  The previous national law regulating special economic zones, the 2007 Law "On SEZs" had 
provided that SEZs could be established for a pe riod of not more than 25 years and administered 
by the customs authorities as customs regimes of free customs zone within the SEZs' borders.  
Foreign and Kazakhstani goods placed and used in an SEZ were exempt from customs duties and 
taxes, except for excise tax applied to imports.  Other than safety requirements, no non-tariff 
regulatory measures were applied.  When goods were exported from the territory of SEZs to 
another country, neither taxes nor tariffs were charged.  When goods incorporating foreign 
components were exported to the rest of Kazakh stan, import duties were not applied, provided 
they met the sufficient processing criteria.  The SEZ origin of goods was confirmed by a certificate of origin.  When such certificate of origin was not available, the goods were considered to be either 
Kazakhstani (when exported from Kazakhstan to third countries) or foreign (when imported into 
the rest of Kazakhstan). 
909.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the 2011 Law "On SEZs" which applied as 
of 2011, stipulated procedures for establishing and operating SEZs on the territory of Kazakhstan.  
SEZs were considered a part of the territory of  Kazakhstan with defined boundaries within which 
the Government applied a special regime for conducting priority types of activities.  Within an SEZ, 
a special customs and tax regime was established for foreign and domestic goods imported into 
the SEZ from: (i) the rest of the EAEU territory, and, (ii) third countries; and to goods exported 
from the SEZ to: (i) the rest of the EAEU territory, and, (ii) third countries.  Kazakhstan's products and products of the EAEU member States were treated as domestic goods for the purpose of 
applying customs duties when placed under the cu stoms regime of free customs zones, i.e., were 
not subject to customs duties.  As for VAT in accordance with Section XVII of the EAEU Treaty (see Section on "Application of Internal Taxes on Imports" of this Report) imports from 
EAEU member States would be subject to VAT.  However, Article 21 of the CU Agreement on SEZs, 
which superseded Kazakhstan's national legislation, indicated that goods from 
EAEU member States placed under the customs regime of free customs zone would be eligible for 
zero rate VAT provided that a copy of the custom s declaration certified by customs authorities in 
accordance with which such goods were placed under the customs procedure of customs-free zone was submitted.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that only goods included into the list of goods that were required for a SEZ participan t to carry out priority activities could be placed 
under the customs regime of free customs zone, i.e ., be exempted from payment of import duties 
and VAT.  These lists of goods were defined in a contract on conducting activity signed with each 
SEZ participant.  The Ministry of Investments and Development was the relevant authorized body 
administering the establishment, operation and termin ation of SEZs on the territory of Kazakhstan.   
910.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that according to the 2011 Law "On 
SEZs", central or local executive bodies, and juridical persons of Kazakhstan could submit a 
proposal on establishment of an SEZ to the comp etent authority, which contained the information 
on the purpose of the SEZ, priority business acti vities, current economic situation in the region, 
where the SEZ would be located, and the forecasted  impact on the economy.  Upon approval of 
the proposal by the competent authority, the entity had to conduct a feasibility study for the 
proposed SEZ with the assessment of the effect on the environment.  Upon approval of findings of 
the feasibility study by all relevant Government agencies, the competent authority submitted the proposal on establishment of an SEZ to the Government.  A decision on establishment of an SEZ 
and on priority business activities that correspon ded to the objectives of the SEZ was adopted by 
the President based on the proposal of the Government.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 216 - 
 
  911.  Pursuant to Article 8 of the 2011 Law "On SEZs", an SEZ could be established for a period 
of up to 25 years.  The term of operation of each SEZ was determined in a Presidential Decree on creation of that particular SEZ.  The land plots on which SEZs were established and used for conducting priority activities were leased to the prospective SEZ operators in accordance with the 
land legislation of Kazakhstan for the term for which a particular SEZ was established.  Normally, 
an SEZ was liquidated upon expiration of its term.  In case of failure to reach the target indicators of an SEZ by its residents, an SEZ could be terminated by the President of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, based on the proposal of the Governme nt.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that once a SEZ was established, investors could apply to become an SEZ resident, i.e., to be registered as a juridical person eligible for a special tax regime and other conditions more favourable than those available to juridical persons in the rest of the customs territory, and 
conclude agreements that specified terms of their ac tivities within an SEZ.  The list of documents 
that had to be submitted by an applicant was de scribed in Article 10 of the 2011 Law "On SEZs".  
The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that  foreign invested firms, irrespective of the 
percentage of foreign participation, could be registered as SEZ residents, subject to fulfillment of 
respective requirements applied on a non-discriminatory basis to all applicants.  An applicant had to have financial resources and other property in an amount specified in the feasibility study report 
and its business activity had to correspond to the ob jectives and legitimate activities in an SEZ.  
912.  The following entities could not apply to conduct an activity within the SEZs: 
 (i) subsoil users; 
(ii) entities producing excisable goods, except for entities that produced and 
assembled excisable goods stipulated in sub-paragraph 6 of Article 279 of the Tax 
Code; 
 (iii) entities using special tax regimes; 
 (iv) entities that were granted investment tax preferences; and, 
 (v) entities involved in gambling business.  
913.  The representative of Kazakhstan also noted that the 2011 Law "On SEZs" envisaged the 
creation of managing companies in the form of joint stock companies.  The following entities could 
become founders of a managing company:   
 (i) the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
 (ii) local executive bodies of oblasts, the city of a Republican status, the capital city; 
 (iii) non-State juridical persons; or, 
(iv) foreign juridical persons with an experience in managing SEZ in other countries or 
in Kazakhstan. 
914.  Pursuant to the 2011 Law "On SEZs", in the event an SEZ was established on the initiative 
of central or local executive bodies, the State re tained ownership of at least 50% of the voting 
shares issued by the managing company, unless otherwise provided in the Presidential Decree on 
the establishment of the SEZ.  If the SEZ was esta blished on the initiative of a non-State juridical 
person, the State retained ownership of at least 26%  of the voting shares issued by the managing 
company.  The specified legal form of a managing company allowed investors to participate in the share capital of the managing company, and thus, to participate in the management of project 
implementation and to ensure transparency of procedures applied within the SEZ.   
915.  According to the 2011 Law "On SEZs", a "single window" had been introduced for the 
provision of public services within SEZs, which envisaged simplified procedures for preparation and 
submission of documents.  
916.  The six existing SEZs created under the 2007 Law "On SEZs" had adopted the operational 
and administrative provisions of the 2011 Law "On SEZs" when that Law had come into force 
(see Annex 21 of this Report for a list of the current SEZs and their purposes).   
- (c) Customs and Tax Legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
917.  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that the Tax Code that had entered into 
force in January 2009 established a uniform approach to tax preferences granted for SEZ 
residents, including the residents of SEZs created under the 2007 Law "On SEZs".  In addition to WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 217 - 
 
  customs duty exemptions, Article 151 of the Ta x Code provided for reduction by 100% of the 
corporate income tax rate, zero coefficient to related rates in calculation of the land tax, and 0% rate to the average value of the property subject to  taxation in calculation of the property tax.  
Moreover, in accordance with Article 244-2 of the Tax Code, sales to the territory of an SEZ of 
goods that were included in the list of goods determined by the Government and fully consumed in 
conducting business activities that met the purposes  of the SEZ were to be taxed at zero rate of 
VAT.  The latter provision was aimed at equalizing  the treatment provided to goods imported to 
SEZs from the territory of Kazakhstan with the treatment provided to foreign goods described in 
paragraph 903 of this Section. 
918.  Pursuant to Article 150 of the Tax Code, to be eligible for tax preferences, SEZ residents 
had to comply with the following requirements:  (i) be registered at the tax authorities within a 
SEZ territory; (ii) have no structural divisions outside of an SEZ territory; and (iii) of the total 
annual income from sales of goods of own production (works, services), derive at least 90% from the activities that complied with the objectives of an SEZ.  Business activities that complied with 
the objectives of SEZs were identified in Article 150 of the Tax Code and included projects aimed 
at development of the IT industry; textile indust ry and production of leather goods; chemical 
industry; metallurgical industry; machinery building, including production of vehicles, trailer trucks 
and two-wheel trailers; production of railroad engines and rolling stock; production of electric 
equipment and household appliances; pharmaceutical industry; food production; paper and furniture production; aviation industry; petrochemical industry and related industries and technologies; and tourism services.   
919.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan's legislation provided uniform 
requirements both for domestic and foreign companies to be eligible for tax and customs preferences in SEZs.  
920.  A Member said that Kazakhstan's SEZs were authorized by legislation that contained 
provisions for granting special benefits contingent on export orientation and/or import substitution of enterprises.  This Member held the view that, these provisions violated both the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, as well as the WTO Agreement on 
Trade-Related Investment Measures, and, therefore,  should be eliminated.  This Member sought a 
commitment from Kazakhstan that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan would ensure the enforcement of its WTO obligations in SEZs existing or established within its territory, including the 
prohibition of TRIMs or subsidies based on the us e of domestic goods or export performance.  
Kazakhstan was also asked to confirm that the right of firms to establish and operate in these zones would not depend on export performance, trade balancing, or local content criteria.  
In addition, Kazakhstan needed to ensure that goods produced in the SEZs under tax and tariff 
provisions that exempted imports and imported inputs from tariffs and certain taxes would be 
subject to normal customs formalities when entering the rest of Kazakhstan, including the 
application of tariffs and taxes. 
921.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that both criteria related to export performance 
and import substitution had been removed by Decree of the President of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 657 "On Amendments to Decrees of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 853 of 26 April 2002 and No. 1166 of 18 August  2003" of 19 September 2008.  According to 
Decree of the President No. 657, the term "export oriented production" used in legislation that regulated SEZs had been changed to the term "competitiveness", while the term "import 
substitution" had been removed from the texts of  the Decrees.  In addition, Resolution of the 
Government of Kazakhstan No. 1376 "On Approval of the Regulation on Establishment and Allocation of Finances of the Fund for Economic and Social Development of Special Economic 
Zones" of 26 September 1997 had been revoked.  Fu rthermore, there were no provisions related 
to the right to establish an enterprise in an SEZ that were made contingent upon export performance and/or import substitution contai ned in the 2011 Law "On SEZs", the CU Agreement 
on SEZs, or any of the Presidential Decrees relating to SEZs.  
922.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that at the moment, ten SEZs were operational in 
Kazakhstan:  "Astana-New City", "Seaport Aktau", "Innovation Technologies Park", "Ontustyk", "National Industrial Petrochemical Techno-Park", "Burabai", "Saryarka", "Pavlodar", "Horgos-East 
Gates" and "Chemical Park 'Taraz'".  The first six of these had been established under the 2007 
Law "On SEZs".  Their terms and periods of operation were now regulated by the 2011 Law "On WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 218 - 
 
  SEZs".  The other four were established as SEZs under the 2011 Law "On SEZs" (see Annex 21 of 
this Report for more information on these zones). 
- (d) Free Warehouse Customs Regime 
923.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that establishment and operation of free 
warehouses on the territory of Kazakhstan were regulated by Article 27 "Establishment and 
Functioning of Free (Special) Economic Zones an d Free Warehouses" of the EAEU Treaty and the 
CU Agreement on Free Warehouses and Free Warehouse Customs Procedure of 18 June 2010 
(hereinafter: CU Agreement on Free Warehouses).  According to this Agreement, a free warehouse 
was a construction (building), within which foreig n goods and goods of the EAEU placed under the 
customs regime of a free warehouse, as well as other goods in accordance with the Agreement, 
could be placed and used.  She added that accord ing to Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Free 
Warehouses, a free warehouse customs regime was a customs regime under which foreign goods 
were placed and used without payment of customs duties and taxes, as well as without application 
of non-tariff regulatory measures; and goods of the EAEU were placed and used without 
application of bans and restrictions.  Goods banned for importation into the EAEU territory or for 
exportation from the EAEU territory could not be placed under free warehouse customs regime.    
924.  She further explained that according to the CU Agreement on Free Warehouses, the owner 
of a free warehouse was a juridical person of the EAEU member State which was registered in 
accordance with the national legislation of the relevant EAEU member State and met the 
requirements established in Article 4 of the Agreem ent.  The juridical person was recognized as an 
owner of a free warehouse upon inclusion of that person by customs authorities into the Register 
of free warehouse owners.  The procedures for in cluding and excluding owners of free warehouses 
into/from the Register were established in Reso lution of the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 1086 "On Certain Issues of Regulation of Activities of Free Warehouses" of 
22 September 2011.   
925.  Pursuant to Article 11 of the CU Agreement on Free Warehouses, the following operations 
could be performed at free warehouses: 
(i) storage (stockpiling, splitting) of the goods; 
(ii) loading (unloading) of goods and other cargo operations associated with storage; (iii) operations to ensure safety of goods, as well as simple operations on preparing 
goods for shipment and sale, including fragmentation of the consignments, 
formation of shipments, sorting, packagin g, repackaging, labelling, and operations 
to improve product quality; 
(iv) processing operations as a result of which goods lost their individual 
characteristics, and/or manufacturing and production of goods (including 
assembly, dis-assembly, installation and adjustment), as well as repair operations; or, 
(v) operations involving transactions on transfer of ownership, use and/or disposal 
rights for these products.   
926.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that in accordance with Article 8 of the 
CU Agreement on Free Warehouses, foreign goods placed under the customs regime of a free 
warehouse retained the status of foreign goods, and goods of the EAEU placed under the customs 
regime of a free warehouse retained the status of the goods of the EAEU.   
927.  Article 14 of the CU Agreement on Free Warehouses established procedures for payment of 
customs duties and taxes applied to goods exported from the free warehouses.  In particular, 
goods of the EAEU exported from free warehouses  into the rest of the EAEU customs territory, 
were not subject to payment of customs duties, including export duties.  Goods with the status of 
goods of the EAEU exported from free warehouses to locations outside of the EAEU customs 
territory were subject to payment of export cust oms duties, where applicable.  When calculating 
export duty, the duty rate itself, value of good s and/or the physical characteristics of in-kind 
(number, mass, volume or other characteristics), as well as the quantity of goods and the 
exchange rate, established in accordance with th e legislation of the EAEU member State, were 
determined on the day of registration by customs authorities of the customs declaration, submitted for placing goods under the customs regime of export.  As for foreign goods, they were subject to WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 219 - 
 
  payment of import customs duties and VAT when ex ported from free warehouses into the rest of 
the EAEU customs territory.  When foreign goods were exported from free warehouses outside of 
the EAEU customs territory, export duties and VAT were not levied.  She further stated that goods 
produced (processed) in free warehouses whose owners were included into the Register of free 
warehouse owners prior to 1 January 2012 , incorporating imported components and recognized as 
goods of the EAEU , were not subject to payment of customs duties when exported from free 
warehouses into the rest of the EAEU customs territory.  The latter provision expired on 
1 January 2017.  Goods produced (processed) with the use of foreign goods could be recognized 
as EAEU goods if they met the following criteria of sufficient processing described in Article 16 of the CU Agreement on Free Warehouses:  
(i) manufacturing had changed the goods' HS code at the level of any first four digits;  
(ii) its transformation was recognized as sufficiently implementing a pre-determined 
list of conditions, production and technological or manufacturing operations, necessary to be recognized as goods of the EAEU; and, 
(iii) the percentage share of the value added had reached a pre-determined share of 
the price of the final good (the rule of ad valorem  share); or the percentage share 
of the cost of foreign goods did not exceed  a pre-determined share in the price of 
the final good.  
928.  The list of conditions and operations for goods manufactured in free warehouses 
incorporating imported goods that were, or were not, sufficient for these goods to be recognized as 
goods of the EAEU was adopted by the Commission by consensus.  The Commission also approved 
the procedure for using the rule of ad valorem  share as a criterion of sufficient processing for 
these goods to be recognized as goods of the EAEU. 
929.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that according to the national 
legislation of Kazakhstan, goods that were produced in free warehouses and sold from these areas 
to the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan were exempt from VAT if they met the sufficient processing criteria adopted by the Government of  the Republic of Kazakhstan and were included 
into the list of products adopted by the Governme nt of Kazakhstan.  This preference was provided 
in accordance with Article 49 of Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 100-IV "On Entering Into Force of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Taxes and Other Mandatory Payments to the 
Budget'" of 10 December 2008 and Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 133 "On the 
List of Goods Produced in the Territory of Fr ee Warehouse and Sold by the Owner of a Free 
Warehouse in the Territory of the Republic of Ka zakhstan, Sales Turnover of which are Exempted 
from VAT, and the List of Goods Produced in the Territory of Free Warehouse and Sold from this 
Territory to the Rest of the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 19 January 2012.  According 
to the Tax Code, the preference would expire on 1 January 2017. 
930.  According to Article 7 of Government Reso lution No. 793 "On Approval of Rules of 
Determining the Country of Origin of Goods, Execut ion, Confirmation and Issuance of Certificate on 
Origin of Goods and Repeal of Certain Decisions of  the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan" 
of 16 July 2014, goods were considered as meetin g sufficient processing criteria if one of the 
following conditions were fulfilled:   
- processing of goods resulted in a change of the HS code at the level of any  first four-
digits; 
- fulfillment of certain industrial and technological operations sufficient to recognize a 
country where these operations took place as a country of origin of these goods; or, 
- changes in the cost of a good when the perc entage share of the cost reached a fixed share 
of the price of the finished good ( ad valorem  percentage rule).  
Government Resolution No.  793 described the terms, manufacturing and technological operations 
required for a good to acquire an origin status when goods imported from third countries were used in a production process. 
931.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that currently 59 juridical persons were registered 
as free warehouse owners in Kazakhstan.  Their operations were specialized primarily in the 
following activities:  assembly of vehicles, assembly of agricultural machines and equipment, food production, and production of construction materials.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 220 - 
 
  932.  Members recalled that substantial transformation and local content level could not be 
applied to goods produced or processed in SEZs or free warehouse customs regimes with imported goods from non-EAEU member States for the purp ose of exempting these goods from application 
of customs duties or taxes when sold into the rest of Kazakhstan.  These imported inputs should 
re-acquire their tariffs or taxes when entering Ka zakhstan or EAEU territory, whether or not they 
have been processed in SEZs or free warehouses and transformed into other products.  In their view, to treat these imported inputs differently for tax or tariff purposes would not be consistent 
with Article I of the GATT 1994, and exempting these charges based on an assessment of local 
content (substantial transformation criteria) could constitute a prohibited subsidy.  Members asked 
Kazakhstan to eliminate these provisions and to operate its SEZs and free warehouses in conformity with WTO provisions.   
933.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, subject to the exceptions that applied for 
the transition periods specified below in respect of the goods of juridical persons registered in SEZs 
and/or operating free warehouses prior to Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, SEZs and free 
warehouses in Kazakhstan would be established, maintained and administered from the date of 
accession in conformity with the provisions of the WTO Agreement.  She added that Kazakhstan 
would apply the provisions of the WTO Agreement in  all of its SEZs and in the operation of free 
warehouses.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
934.  With respect to local content requirements, sufficient processing, i.e., substantial 
transformation, and exemptions from tariffs and taxes, the goods of juridical persons which had been registered and active in SEZs and free warehouses prior to Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO, would continue to enjoy the treatment described in paragraphs 904, 907, 927, and 929 of 
this Report, during the transition period endi ng on 1 January 2017.  Upon expiration of the 
transition period, firms registered in SEZs and operating these free warehouses would not be 
subject to export performance, trade balancing, or local content criteria requirements, in law or in 
practice, nor would any new firms registering in SEZs or operating a free warehouse be subject to such requirements.  In addition, goods imported into free warehouses and SEZs under provisions 
that exempt imports from non-EAEU member States  from customs duties and certain taxes, which 
were then released to the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan and the territory of the EAEU, would 
be subject to those duties and taxes as applicable  and customs formalities when entering the rest 
of the territory of Kazakhstan and the territory  of the EAEU.  If those imported goods were 
reprocessed, i.e., substantially transformed, within the territory of an SEZ or in a free warehouse, 
the duties and taxes that would otherwise have been assessed for those goods were to be paid 
when the final products entered the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan and the territory of the 
EAEU.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Government Procurement  935.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated th at government procurement was governed by: 
Law No. 303-III "On Government Procurement" of 21 July 2007 (hereinafter: Law "On Government 
Procurement")  as amended by Law No. 15-V of 27 April 2012; Government Resolution No. 1301 "On Approval of the Rules of Conducting Government Procurement" of 27 December 2007 (hereinafter: Government Resolution No. 1301); Government Resolution No. 623 "On Approval of 
the Rules of  Conducting Electronic Government Procurement" of 15 May 2012 (hereinafter: 
Government Resolution No. 623); and, Government Resolution No. 470 "On the Determination of State Support for Domestic Categories of Potential Suppliers" of 11 May 2014.  The above 
legislation had been developed taking into account the requirements of international law, 
specifically the Model Law on Public Procurement of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).   
936.  Kazakhstan's government procurement legislation was aimed at developing fair 
competition among potential suppliers, providing equal opportunities for potential suppliers to participate in government procurement, optimal and effective expenditure of cash assets used for the Government, and providing publicity and tr ansparency of the government procurement 
process.  The body responsible for development an d implementation of State policy in the area of 
government procurement was the Ministry of  Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 221 - 
 
  937.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that pursuant to Law "On Government 
Procurement", government procurement was defined as purchases made by customers of goods and services
20 essential for their operation, performance of State functions or customer's statutory 
activities, conducted in accordance with Law "On Government Procurement" and civil legislation of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, except for the se rvices purchased from natural persons under 
employment contracts or from natural persons not involved in entrepreneurial activities, on the base of paid services contracts, in the framewor k of fulfilment of State tasks and contributions, 
including contributions to the capital stock of newly established juridical persons.  Customers were 
State bodies, State agencies, as well as State enterprises
21, juridical persons and any affiliates 
thereof, with 50% or more of voting shares held  by the Government, except for national managing 
holdings, national holdings, national managing companies and national companies, and their 
affiliated entities, including the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", which was a national 
managing holding.  The procurement regulations of national managing holdings, national holdings and national companies, and their affiliated entiti es, including the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-
Kazyna", which was a national managing holding,  are described in Section "State Ownership, 
State-Trading Entities and Privatization" of this Report.  
938.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the process of government procurement 
included the following stages:  (i) elaboration and approval of an annual government procurement 
plan; (ii) selection of a supplier and conclusion of a State procurement contract; and, (iii) fulfilment of the State procurement contract.  
939.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that  government procurement could be conducted 
through the following methods:  (i) tender; (ii) one source procurement; (iii) supplier selection on 
the basis of price quotation requests; (iv) auctio n; and, (v) commodity exchange.  The method for 
conducting government procurement could be selected by the customer without coordination with 
the Ministry of Finance.  Government procurement by auction and price quotation requests could 
be conducted only in electronic format.  Government procurement by tender and one source methods could be conducted in both paper and electronic formats.  From 1 July 2012, government 
procurement by tender was conducted only in elec tronic format.  The lists of goods eligible for 
procurement through auction, one source and co mmodity exchange are contained in Annex 22(A), 
Annex 22(B) and Annex 22(C) of this Report.  
940.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the tender was the main method of 
government procurement and could be used in all cases.  Government procurement by the one 
source method could be conducted in the following cases:  (i) State enterprises and juridical persons and affiliates thereof, with 50% or more of voting shares held by the Government, needed 
to conduct other purchases from the same supplier for the purposes of unification, standardization 
or ensuring compatibility with already purchase d goods, equipment, technology or services; 
(ii) government procurement by the tender method had been recognized as invalid; (iii) there was 
a necessity to conduct government procurement of goods and services of daily and/or weekly 
needs as an interim measure while the results of  the ongoing government procurement by tender 
were concluded and entered into force; or (iv) measures provided by Law "On Government Procurement"that were undertaken by a customer did not result in conclusion of a government 
procurement contract by the method of price quotation requests.  Government procurement by the 
price quotation request method had to be conducted in relation to like goods and services in cases where the volume of such goods and services did not exceed 4,000 MCI established for the 
relevant fiscal year on the basis of the law on the national budget.  Moreover, the price was a 
determining factor in government procurement by the price quotation request method.  Government procurement by the auction method ha d to be conducted through official web portal 
of government procurement in the real-time mode.  Government procurement by auction had to 
be conducted by single operator in government procurement.  The government procurement subject to auction were goods and services according to the list approved by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, with an annual volume more than 4,000 MCI established for the 
relevant fiscal year by the law on the national budget.  Government procurement of goods through 
                                               
20 The term "services" included both "services" and "works" as those terms were used in the legislation 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
21 State enterprises are defined in Se ction "State Ownership, State Tradin g Entities and Privatization" of 
this Report. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 222 - 
 
  commodity exchanges had to be conducted based on the list of commodity exchange goods in 
accordance with the legislation of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan on commodity exchanges. 
941.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Law "On Government Procurement" contained 
provisions on transparency of the procedures fo r conducting government procurement.  All the 
information on government procurement was provided  on the official website (web portal) of the 
Ministry of Finance: www.goszakup.gov.kz. The info rmation on the regulation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan in the field of government procurement was provided at 
http://goszakup.gov.kz/wiki/index.php?title=Main_p age. No later than three working days from 
the date of approval of the competitive bid documents, but not less than 30 calendar days, and, in case of electronic government procurement, not less than 20 calendar days, before the final date for submission of applications for participation in the competitive bidding by potential suppliers, 
the organizer of government procurement was oblige d to:  (i) place on the customer's website the 
text of the announcement on conducting the government procurement by tender, and the list of competitive bid documents; (ii)  place on the of ficial web portal of government procurement the 
text of the announcement on conducting the govern ment procurement by tender; and, (iii)  ensure 
in the chronological order registration on the cu stomer's website the facts of presentation of 
competitive bid documents.  Notices of invitation for participation in government procurement had 
to include the following information:  full name; postal and electronic addresses of the organizer of 
government procurement; the subject of the contra ct; the required amount; the location and date 
of delivery of goods and services; the place and ways for obtaining a copy of the tender documentation; the place and deadline for submission of applications for participation in the 
tender; and the date, time and place of opening envelopes with applications for participation in the 
tender. 
942.  She noted that the winner of the tender was selected in accordance with the rules 
established in the national legislation, i.e., the laws and rules laid out in paragraph 935 of this 
Section.  Within two working days after completi on of the tender process, the protocol of the 
government procurement results was published on an official website of the entity and on the 
web portal on government procurement. 
943.  In response to questions about the local content requirements in Kazakhstan's government 
procurement laws, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that such requirements were set out by Law "On Government Procurement" and Go vernment Resolutions No. 1301 and No. 623.  
When the Tender Commission evaluated and compared  all submitted bids, it took into account the 
criteria stipulated in paragraph 4 of Article 17 of Law "On Government Procurement".  These criteria had to be specified in the tender documentation and applied equally to all 
competitive bids.  In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 17 of Law "On Government 
Procurement", the competitive price quotations of participants were affected by the following criteria:  (i) characteristics of a potential supplier as follows:  (a) experience in the market of 
goods and services which was required for conducted government procurement; (b) a document 
confirming performance of voluntary certification of goods by domestic producers in accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation on technical regulation; (c) a certified system on management quality in accordance with State standards; and (d) a certified system on management of environmental 
control in accordance with the requirements of State standards and/or the confirmation of 
compliance with a standard of ecologically clean production in accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation on technical regulation; (ii) the functional, technical and qualitative characteristics of 
goods and services, and/or the costs of operat ion, maintenance and repair of the purchased 
goods; and, (iii) local content.  In accordance with Law "On Government Procurement"and Government Resolutions No. 1301 and No. 623, the Tender Commission could reduce the 
conditional competitive price quotation for domestic producers of goods by up to 20% and for 
domestic suppliers of serv ices (works) up to 15%.  
944.  The potential supplier had the right to appeal actions (omissions) of the customer, 
organizer of government procurement, commission s, expert and single operator involved in 
government procurement where their actions (omissio ns) infringed rights and legal interests of the 
potential supplier. 
945.  In response to the question of a Member on whether there would be a common EAEU 
procurement regime for state and/or municipal procurement, the representative of Kazakhstan 
stated that the legal basis for the common policy was Section XXII "Government (Municipal) Procurement" and Annex No.25 "Protocol on Regulati on of Procurement" of the EAEU Treaty, which WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 223 - 
 
  came into effect on 1 January 2015.  These provisions replaced the Single Economic Space 
Agreement on State (Municipal) Procurement which came into effect on 1 January 2012. Article 88 of Section XXII of the EAEU Treaty stipulated th at member States granted national treatment for 
government procurement conducted by State bodies and State agencies to other EAEU 
member States on a reciprocity basis. The EAEU Treaty covered procurement conducted by State 
bodies, budget-funded organizations, including State agencies as well as other entities specified by the government procurement legislation of EAEU member States. The EAEU Treaty did not cover 
procurement of State enterprises performing activities of commercial character and enterprises 
with State participation as well as procurement of the National (Central) banks.  
946.  Members noted that the scope of "government procurement", as provided for in current 
Kazakhstan's legislation, covered more than "procurement", as defined in Articles III:8 and XVII:2 
of the GATT 1994 and Article XIII: 1 of the GATS, i.e., products and services purchased for 
governmental purposes and not with a view to co mmercial re-sale or, with a view, to use in the 
production of goods for commercial sale, or to use in the supply of services for commercial sale.  
"Procurement" also appeared to cover more than the goods and services typically subject to the 
WTO Agreement on Government Procurement.  Laws, regulations and other measures relating to purchases that fell outside the scope of the definitions in Articles III:8 and XVII:2 of 
the GATT 1994, and Article XIII:1 of  the GATS, would not be excluded from the coverage of the 
Agreements in Annex 1 of the Marrakesh Agreemen t Establishing the World Trade Organization.  
These Members noted that in Kazakhstan's legislation, "procurement" appeared to include, in addition to goods for governmental purposes, goods and services for direct consumption and 
support, i.e., products or services by firms that were sold commercially or used to produce goods 
and services for commercial sale.  They sought confirmation that, in making purchases that would not be considered as government procurement within the meaning of Articles III:8 and XVII:2 of 
the GATT 1994 and Article XIII:1 of  the GATS, and that national treatment and MFN requirements 
would apply.  These Members also sought confirmation that Kazakhstan would ensure that goods and services procured under Kazakhstan's legislation on government procurement would not be 
re-sold in the commercial sphere or used in the production of goods or the supply of services for 
commercial sale.   
947.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, in respect of procurement of goods and 
services, including by State-owned and State-controlled enterprises, which were not purchased for 
governmental purposes, but with a view to commercial re-sale or with a view to use for production 
of goods and supply of services for commercial sale, from the date of accession, such purchases and sales would not be considered to be "gov ernment procurement" within the meaning of 
Articles III:8(a) of the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and XIII:1 of the WTO 
Agreement on Trade in Services, and thus, the Re public of Kazakhstan and the competent bodies 
of the EAEU would comply with all applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The Working 
Party took note of this commitment. 
948.  Some Members of the Working Party sought a commitment from Kazakhstan that it would 
initiate negotiations for membership in the Agreement on Government Procurement by tabling an entity offer immediately after its accession to the WTO. 
949.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed the intention of Kazakhstan to join the 
WTO Agreement on Government Procurement and to notify the WTO Committee on Government 
Procurement to this effect at the time of accessi on of Kazakhstan to the WTO and to ensure that 
from the date of accession, its Government agencies would award contracts in a transparent 
manner according to published laws, regulations and guidelines.  She also confirmed that Kazakhstan would request the status of an "observer" in the WTO Agreement on Government 
Procurement at the time of its accession to the WTO and would initiate negotiations for 
membership in the WTO Agreement on Government  Procurement by tabling an Appendix 1 offer 
within four years after accession.  She confirmed that, if the results of the negotiations were satisfactory to the interests of Kazakhstan and the other Members of the Agreement, Kazakhstan 
would accede to that Agreement.  The Work ing Party took note of these commitments. 
950.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed that the Government of Kazakhstan was 
developing amendments to the legislation on government procurement with the purpose to 
exclude procurements made by state enterprises and enterprises with state participation, i.e., 
State-owned and State-controlled enterprises, procuring goods and services for the purpose of commercial sale (re-sale) from the coverage of Law "On Government Procurement".  The relevant WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 224 - 
 
  amendments to the legislation of Kazakhstan regulating government procurement would be 
enacted by the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO. 
- Transit 951.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan allowed free transit consistent 
with the provisions of Article V of the GATT 199 4.  She added that the basic principles that 
Kazakhstan had followed previously had not been affected by the participation of Kazakhstan either in the Customs Union or the Eurasian Econ omic Union.  From 1 July 2010, customs control 
of goods in transit through the territory of Ka zakhstan had been based on the provisions of 
Chapter 32 of the Treaty on the Customs Code  of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 
(hereinafter: CU Customs Code).  The provisions of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter: 
Customs Code of Kazakhstan) concerning transit control were applied to the extent that they did 
not conflict with the CU Customs Code.   
952.  Specifically, Article 215 of the CU Customs Code stated that customs transit was a customs 
procedure under which foreign goods (i.e., not Russian, Kazakhstani or Belarusian) were 
transported:  (i) across the EAEU customs territo ry under customs custody between the points of 
their entry into and departure from the EAEU customs territory (i.e., if transit constituted a part of 
their itinerary which began and ended outside th e boundaries of the EAEU customs territory); 
(ii) from the point of entry into the EAEU to an internal customs point; (iii) from an internal customs point to the point of departure from th e EAEU customs territory; and, (iv) between two 
internal customs points within the EAEU customs territory.  In addition, it provided that the 
customs procedure of customs transit was applied to goods transported by international mail, by 
pipelines and by power transmission lines.  Goods in customs transit were exempted from any customs taxes and duties or application of any economic restrictions or prohibitions, except for:  
(i) prohibitions applied to the goods listed in Sub-Section 1 of the "Common List of Goods that are 
Subject to Bans and Restrictions on Importation and Exportation by Parties of the Customs Union 
of the Eurasian Economic Community in Trade wi th Third Countries", adop ted by CU Commission 
Decision No.132 "On Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009, re-approved by Decision of the EEC Collegium  No .134 "On Normative Legislative Acts in the Area 
of Non-Tariff Regulation" of 16 August 2012, and included in Annex 6 of this Report; (ii) SPS 
measures described in Section "Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures" of this Report; and, 
(iii) prohibitions introduced by the Republic of Kazakhstan in regulations implementing UN Security Council Decisions.   
953.  Any foreign merchandise could be subject to international customs transit, except for 
goods whose transit was prohibited pursuant to laws, other statutes and legal norms of the EAEU and Kazakhstan and other international treaties to which Kazakhstan was a party.  However, 
specific control procedures for goods in transit tr ansported by railway on the territory of the EAEU 
were defined by a separate CU Agreement, i.e., the Agreement on the Specificity of Customs Transit of Goods, Transported by Railway on th e Customs Territory of the Customs Union of  
21 May 2010, in effect since 1 July 2010.  Furthermore, as stipulated in Article 215 of the 
CU Customs Code, customs transit procedure was not applied to the goods transported by air 
transport, if the air vessel, in an international flight, performed an intermediate landing or a landing by necessity (technical landing) without a partial discharging (unloading) of goods.  
She added that customs transit could be applied to goods of EAEU member States if these goods 
were transported from a point of departure in the EAEU to the point of entry in the EAEU through a 
third country.  Goods of EAEU member States originating from one EAEU member State, exported 
through the territory of another EAEU member Stat e, were placed under the customs procedure of 
export and transported through the territory of  the EAEU without being placed under customs 
procedure of transit, unless it had otherwise been decided by the Commission.   
954.  She further noted that, pursuant to Article 216 of the CU Customs Code, the placement of 
goods under the customs procedure of customs transit was allowed, if the following conditions 
were fulfilled:  (i) the import of goods into the customs territory of the EAEU was not prohibited; 
(ii) the documents, confirming that requirements (if any) for the transportation of goods through 
the customs border of the EAEU had been fulfilled, were presented; (iii) if the goods were to be 
subject to such control at the place of arrival, the customs control and other forms of State control 
had been performed at their point of entry; (iv)  the transit declaration had been presented (i.e., WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 225 - 
 
  the goods had been declared); (v) the measures en suring the customs transit in accordance with 
Article 217 of the CU Customs Code were fulfilled; (vi) the identification of goods in accordance 
with  Article 109 of the CU Customs Code was ensured; (vii) the international transport vehicle was equipped in a due manner, if the goods were transported under the customs seals.  According 
to Article 156 of the CU Customs Code, the requir ement specified in point (vii) of the previous 
sentence did not apply to goods carried by sea or river vessels or aircrafts crossing the customs territory of the EAEU without stopping at a port or airport located in the customs territory of the 
EAEU, or to the goods transported via pipelines and electricity transmission lines. 
955.  As of 1 January 2009, transit fees for vehicles were regulated by Article 461 of Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008.  Pursuant to Arti cle 461 of the Tax Code, transit fees for foreign 
vehicles transporting international cargoes by  automobile roads were fixed at 10 Monthly 
Calculation Index (MCI).  In 2014, the transit fee had been equal to KZT 18,520 (approximately US$100).  As for railway transit, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan was a 
party to the Agreement on International Transit Tariffs (ITT) and the Agreement on the Single 
Transit Tariffs (STT).  Thus, railway tariff rate s for carrying goods in transit were established 
according to the principles of these inte rnational Agreements and calculated on a 
non-discriminatory basis.  Basic ceiling tariffs were calculated on the principles provided for by 
these Agreements and the members established applied tariffs below the ceiling calculated annually.  The transit tariff rates for same railways/destinations were unique and did not depend on the origin of goods.  Generally, the transit tariff policy was mostly dependent on competitive 
capacity of international transit routes, crossing  several countries, and the rates were established 
by such countries jointly (see Chapter II "Economic Policies", Section "Pricing Policies" of this Report for more information).  
956.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that as of 1 July 2010, pursuant to Article 217 of 
the CU Customs Code, measures of provision compliance with the customs transit included:  (i) a guarantee for payment of customs duties and taxes in relation to foreign goods in accordance with 
Chapter 12 of the CU Customs Code; (ii) customs escort; and, (iii) establishment of routes for 
transportation of goods (applied only as an additional measure to the above-mentioned measures).  Customs escort charges and related procedures were described in Chapter III "Policies Affecting Trade in Goods", Section (A) "Import Regulations", Sub-section "Fees and Charges for 
Services Rendered" of this Report.   
957.  Pursuant to Article 218 of the CU Customs Code, customs bodies had the right to put 
goods in transit under customs escort in the following cases:   
- defined on the basis of the risk management system; 
- upon non-presentation of guarantee of payment of customs duties and taxes; - due to repeated non-fulfilment by the transport operator of the operators' obligations in 
transport of goods in accordance with the customs procedure of customs transit, which 
was established by the resolutions that had entered into effect on imposing administrative penalty for cases of customs law infringement, if at least one of the above-mentioned resolutions had not been fulfilled; and, 
- due to non-fulfilment by the transport operator of the obligation to pay the customs duties 
and taxes in accordance with Article 227 of the CU Customs Code. 
958.  She confirmed that these were all of the circumstances in which customs escort could be 
required, but that this list of circumstance s could be changed through amendment of the 
CU Customs Code or establishment of domestic legislation conforming to that Code.  Customs escort of goods was to be carried out to ensu re observance of applicable customs transit 
procedure.  Expenses associated with customs escort had to be fully reimbursed in the form of 
customs fees levied, in accordance with the legislation of Kazakhstan on taxes and duties.   
959.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that guarantees for customs transit were 
regulated by Articles 85 to 88 of the CU Customs Code.  These provisions set out that guarantees 
could be required to secure the fulfilment of the customs taxes and duties payable, unless:  (i) a 
procedure for transit escort was applied; (ii) transit was conducted by Kazakhstan's authorized customs transport operators or accredited economic operators; or (iii) customs transit was 
regulated by the obligations of Kazakhstan under international treaties, inter alia , the Customs 
Convention on International Transport of Good s under Cover of TIR Carnets, that provided WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 226 - 
 
  otherwise.  Transit by power transmission lines,  pipelines and railways was also exempt from 
customs guarantees.  The payer had the right to choose the means of guarantees:  (i) payment in 
cash; (ii) bank guarantee; (iii) surety; (iv) pledge  of property; or (v) other means foreseen in the 
national legislation of an EAEU member.  The repr esentative of Kazakhstan informed Members that 
Article 88 of the CU Customs Code outlined the ru les to assess the value of guarantees and noted 
that guarantees would be approximated to the va lue of the customs taxes and duties payable.  
She further explained that guarantees on customs transit were applied in a transparent and non-
discriminatory manner and, in her view, were in line with the requirements of Article V of 
the GATT 1994 on freedom of transit. 
960.  Asked about the redemption of a guarantee, th e representative of Kazakhstan replied that, 
as of 1 July 2010, pursuant to paragraph 6 of Ar ticle 85 of the CU Customs Code, a guarantee for 
payment of customs duties and taxes was refunded  after the customs body determined that all 
commitments had been fulfilled or if there were no commitments.   
961.  In response to а question from a Member on the impl ementation of the CU Customs Code 
in the area of trade in transit in the national legislation of Kazakhstan, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that Chapter 38 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan included provisions of the CU Customs Code related to trade in transit.  She noted that the Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
incorporated the provisions of the CU Customs Code and EAEU legal instruments concerning the 
customs issues, and additional provisions addressi ng the issues left by the CU Customs Code to 
the national competency of the EAEU member St ates.  In particular, Article 319 of the Customs 
Code of Kazakhstan incorporated Article 215 of the CU Customs Code.   
962.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would apply all its laws, 
regulations and other measures governing transit of goods (including energy), such as those governing charges for transportation of goods in transit by road, rail and air, as well as other 
charges and customs fees imposed in connection with  transit in conformity with the provisions of 
Article V of the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and other relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that, from the date of 
accession, all laws and regulations regarding the application and the level of charges and customs 
fees imposed in connection with transit would be published.  Further, upon receipt of a written 
request of a concerned Member, Kazakhstan would provide to that Member information on the revenue collected from customs fees and custom s charges and on the costs of providing the 
associated services.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- Government-mandated Counter-trade and Barter 963.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that barter trade was not regulated by the 
Government.  Government approval was not required to engage in counter-trade and barter 
transactions.  Moreover, where barter trade occu rred, the products traded were subject to the 
same tariff and non-tariff measures and customs formalities as like products imported through 
normal channels.  For example, Kazakhstan applied the same WTO-based customs valuation 
system for such transactions as was applied to goods imported through normal channels, i.e., if the transaction value of the imported merchandise could not be determined, then the goods were valued on the basis of one of the other valuat ion methods provided under the WTO Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994, applied in sequential order.  Any barter and 
counter-trade arrangements were only co nducted on a company-to-company basis. 
- Agricultural Policies  
(a) Imports 
964.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that in 2013, the volume of imports of agricultural 
products to the Republic of Kazakhstan was equal to 1,6 million tonnes, worth US$1,3 billion, 
including: fruits, vegetables, poultry meat, live animals, dairy products and others.  The Ministry of 
National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan was responsible for foreign trade policy. 
965.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that imports of agricultural products were 
governed by the same general rules, disciplines and procedures applied to non-agricultural goods 
and that agricultural products were subject to ordinary customs duties at rates of the Common WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 227 - 
 
  External Tariff.  Imports of plants, animals, and products thereof, were subject to sanitary and 
phytosanitary requirements in accordance with the EAEU Treaty, CU Commission and EAEU Decisions, other EAEU legal acts and national legislation (for more detailed information see Section "Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures" of this Report).  Bans or quantitative restrictions 
were no longer applied on any agricultural products. 
966.  Tariff Rate Quota was introduced by Kazakhstan in 2010 for imports into the customs 
territory of the EAEU of beef, pork and poultry originating in third countries (see Chapter IV 
"Policies Affecting Trade in Goods", Section (A) "Import Regulations", Sub-section "Tariff Rate 
Quotas" of this Report). 
(b) Exports 
967.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  in 2013, the volume of agricultural exports 
from the Republic of Kazakhstan was equal to 5,8 million tonnes, worth US$1,6 billion, including 
wheat, oilseeds, barley, rice, corn, dried fruit, fish and others. 
968.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that export of agricultural goods did not differ in 
any respect from export of non-agricultural goods.  She added that livestock raw skin and wool 
were subject to export duty.  Bans, quantitative restrictions, quotas, minimum export prices and licencing were not applied on any agricultural products (see Chapter IV "Policies Affecting Trade in 
Goods", Section (B) "Export Regulations"). 
969.  Furthermore, the representative of Kazakhst an stated that Kazakhstan applied export 
subsidies for wheat due to its landlocked geographical location, the vastness of its territory, remoteness from major agricultural markets, insufficient transport and storage infrastructure and 
high transportation costs, which significantly affected the competitiveness of Kazakhstan's 
agricultural product.  When delivering wheat to external markets, the wheat was shipped through 
the Russian Federation or to/through China via railways.  On average, the transportation cost of 
wheat from the territory of Kazakhstan to the closest Russian port was about US$130 per metric 
tonne with a distance of 1,200 km.  The volume of wheat shipped to/through China was insignificant and constituted less than 3% of country's total volume of wheat exports. 
970.  She further added that Kazakhstan's request for export subsidies was based on the 
transportation costs related to wheat shipments transiting through the Russian Federation and that it was highly important for the Government of Kazakhstan to support agricultural producers through subsidizing part of high transportation costs to the global markets. 
(c) Internal policies 
971.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated th at her Government implemented agricultural 
policies in such a manner as to address challenges that occurred in the agricultural sector during 
the years of centrally planned economy, including structural imbalances between prices and 
revenues, low profitability, underdevelopment of production and social infrastructure, low levels of technological upgrading, small-scale agricultural production, lack of private investments, shortage 
of qualified personnel, etc.  She furthermore stated that the following legal acts had been adopted 
to address these challenges:  
- Law No. 66-III "On State Regulation of Agricultural and Industrial Complex and Rural 
Territories Development" of 8 July 2005; and,  
- Government Resolution No. 151 "On Approval of Agriculture Development Programme for 
2013-2020 'Agrobusiness 2020'" of 12 February 2013. 
 
972.  Law No. 66-III "On State Regulation of Agricultural and Industrial Complex and Rural 
Territories Development" of 8 July 2005 establishe d the legal framework for State regulation of 
agriculture and development of rural areas.  Th e Programme adopted by Government Resolution 
No. 151 "On Approval of Agriculture Development Programme for 2013-2020 'Agrobusiness 2020'" 
of 12 February 2013 stipulated key middle-term and long-term policy objectives of the Government aimed at sustainable and competitive development of agriculture. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 228 - 
 
  973.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that agriculture was a key sector and played a 
significant role in economic and social development as nearly 50% of the country's population resided in rural areas.  Agriculture employed al most one third of the working population and was 
critical to addressing poverty and food security related challenges. One of the principal objectives 
of the Government was to increase productivity of the agricultural sector as part of strategy for 
economic diversification.  The Government of Kazakhstan implemented support of the agricultural sector at both republican and local levels. Support falling under the "Green Box" covered many 
government service programmes, including pest and disease control and infrastructural services. 
Support under the "Amber Box" was mainly provid ed in the form of: (i) market price support, 
which is implemented through the allocation of funds from republican budget for procurement of agricultural products directly from producers under the following programmes: (a) procurement for 
the state reserve (wheat); and, (b) procurement to support agricultural producers (crops, livestock 
products); (ii) measures to reduce the cost of agricultural inputs, such as fuel and lubricants, water, combined fodder, pedigree livestock, elite seeds and agricultural chemicals (fertilizers and 
pesticides); and, (iii) soft loans with interest rates lower than market rates. 
974.  She furthermore stated that while the Government had started to implement market 
economy reforms in the agricultural sector after becoming a sovereign state, the development 
level of this sector still remained below the pre-reform stage, especially in the livestock production 
sector. For instance, the number of livestock population was 40% lower than that in 1991.  This reduction was mostly caused due to the reason that over 80% of livestock was concentrated in small households, which used outdated breeding methods and low levels of breeding stock.  
As a result, average productivity of dairy cows in Kazakhstan was four times lower than that in the 
countries with the industrial type of production (in Kazakhstan - 2,000 litres per cow a year; in the developed countries - 7,000 litres per cow a year). 
975.  In regard to crops, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan was located in 
an area of risky farming where dry and sharp contin ental climate prevailed.  As a result, over the 
past few years, dry lands had accounted for about 86% of the country's total area.  Currently, the 
area of irrigated lands in Kazakhstan was 1.5 times lower than the levels of 1991.  About 
800 thousands hectares were not used due to the following reasons: (i) high concentration of salts in the soil; (ii) deterioration of the irrigation and drainage systems; (iii) shortage of water resources; and, (iv) lack of financial resource s and modern equipment.  Approximately 90% of 
agricultural producers were small farms and households and could not purchase high quality 
seeds, up-to-date agricultural equipment and other inputs needed for modern and intensive agricultural production.  All these factors led to deterioration of the soil quality – currently, about 
74% of cultivated lands were in poor condition.  Apart from that, areas usable for agriculture were 
being destroyed by one of the major global environmental disasters – the Aral Sea.  
The disappearance of the Aral Sea resulted in rapid salinization, degradation and desertification of 
the neighbouring areas, where the major population was engaged in the agricultural sector. 
976.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that during the WTO accession process, 
Kazakhstan provided information on domestic support and export subsidies in the agricultural sector starting from the period of 1996-1998 through the recent years from 2006 to 2012.  
Kazakhstan used the most recent and consecutive base period of 2010-2012 for calculation of its 
domestic support to agriculture and providing the da ta on export subsidies.  She further explained 
that domestic support package was based on those levels of support that would allow Kazakhstan 
to undertake measures stipulated in the Government Programme "Agrobusiness 2020" designed to 
address current challenges in the agricultural sector. 
977.  A Member asked Kazakhstan whether it would contemplate targets for increases in "Green 
Box" spending. In response, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that in the course of 
implementation of the programme "Agrobusiness 2020", the share of "Green Box" support in the 
total financing of the agricultural sector was planned to be increased.  The main emphasis would be placed on the policies supporting long-term competitiveness of the sector.  The programme 
pursued the following specific objectives: (i) improvement of access to key inputs and services for 
agricultural producers in the following spheres:  crop production, livestock development, grain 
storage facilities, water supply services, financ ial services, investments projects, educational 
services, agricultural research and consulting services; (ii) improvement of phytosanitary and 
veterinary safety systems; (iii) development of water supply systems; (iv) enhancement of the 
fertilizer and grading efficiency and improvemen t of information services; (v) development of 
organic farming; (vi) agriculture research; and, (vii) water supply systems. Due to drought risk, WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 229 - 
 
  land users and livestock producers heavily depended on artificial water systems.  In order to 
address the existing problems, the programme envi saged construction of irrigation systems for 
distant livestock farming and development of the relevant regulatory framework. 
978.  In response to a request by some Members for more information on the customs union 
legislation on agriculture policies, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the regulatory basis 
for such policy was Annex No. 29 "Protocol on Measures of State Support to Agriculture" to the EAEU Treaty of 29 May 2014.  This Annex replaced the Single Economic Space (SES) Agreement 
on Common Rules for State Support of Agriculture adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 482 of 
8 December 2010, which was terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  From 1 January 2015, the EAEU Treaty established uniform rules for State support measures that affected mutual trade in agricult ural products between the EAEU member States 
and incorporated key provisions of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.  In particular, the EAEU 
Treaty classified state support measures in three categories: (i) measures that did not distort agricultural trade between EAEU member States; (i i) measures that distorted trade substantially; 
and, (iii) trade-distorting measures.  The EAEU Treaty also stipulated the requirements for 
application by the EAEU member States of the above-mentioned categories of State support.  Measures falling under the first category were allowed to be applied by the EAEU member States.  
Those measures, which fell under the second category , were prohibited to apply in mutual trade.  
The amount of State support in the EAEU member  States covered by the third category ("Amber 
Box" measures) should not exceed 10% of the gross value of production of agricultural products in the EAEU member States.  The EAEU Treaty also stated that when EAEU member States joined the 
WTO, their commitments under the WTO Membership would prevail.  
979.  In response to a question on the relationship between measures recorded in Supporting 
Table DS:1 on the creation of public stockholdi ng for food security purposes and DS:5 (market 
price support for procurement to the state reserv e), the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that the state grain reserve was annually renewed by the "Food Contract Corporation", which performed the function of the Government agent responsible for establishment, renewal and 
disposal of the state reserve for food security pu rposes.  Budget outlays spent on storage of the 
state reserves and transporting grain from private elevators to elevators managed by the "Food Contract Corporation" were recorded in Supporting Table DS:1.  The difference between the purchase price of wheat procured to the State re serve and external price of wheat was calculated 
in Supporting Table DS:5.  Furthermore, the re presentative of Kazakhstan explained that 
Kazakhstan's national food security programme involving state procurement of grain and release of such grain at administered prices, did not meet the criteria stipulated in paragraph 3 of Annex 2 
of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.  Therefor e, the above-mentioned measure was included in 
the AMS calculations in Supporting Table DS:5.  Budgetary outlays associated with accumulation of the State reserve and storage costs were report ed in Supporting Table DS:1 for transparency 
purposes only.  
980.  In some Members' view, several measures reported in Supporting Table DS:9 should not 
be categorized as non-product specific support given that they seemed to be associated with specific products or do not benefit all agricultural products.  These Members referred to the 
following measures: (i) mineral fertilizers, seed disinfectants and herbicides subsidies; (ii) fuel and 
lubricants subsidies; (iii) compound feed subsidies; (iv) pedigree livestock subsidies; and, (v) elite seed subsidies. 
981.  The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that the above-mentioned programmes did 
not target a particular agricultural crop or an imal product.  Therefore, subsidies under those 
programmes could not be disaggregated by each type  of crop or animal product.  For example, 
subsidies related to mineral fertilizers, seed disinfectants and herbicides were used to partially 
compensate the cost of chemical products sold by suppliers of agricultural chemicals to agricultural producers at subsidized prices.  Subsidies were paid within the reference limits established by the Ministry of Agriculture for each type of fert ilizers, seed disinfectants and herbicides.  
The programme did not differentiate subsidies for agricultural crops by type of crops. 
982.  She further explained that the Government partially compensated the cost of compound 
feeds. Such subsidies were provided based on the actual volume of bovine meat, pork and poultry 
(carcass weight bases) sold by agricultural producers.  The reference limits were established by 
the Ministry of Agriculture. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 230 - 
 
  983.  As for pedigree livestock subsidies, she explained that the Government partially 
compensated the following products sold to agricultural producers: pedigree livestock growing; breeding eggs; and semen doses.  Subsidies were also granted to cover the full cost of the following measures: procurement and maintenance of breeding bulls; procurement, maintenance 
and utilization of embryos and semen from breeding bulls; procurement of young birds for 
breeding; procurement and maintenance of stud-r ams in the breeding centres; procurement of 
compound feeds for birds in the poultry breeding farms; procurement of special laboratory 
equipment and special agricultural technology for the development of breeding business; and 
procurement, maintenance and training of breeding stallions. 
984.  Furthermore, the Government provided subsidie s with the purpose to reduce the cost of 
production of seeds and seedlings of fruit trees.  Such subsidies were also used to reduce the cost 
of elite seeds purchased by agricultural producers. 
985.  In response to further concerns raised by some Members with regard to classification of 
certain support programmes as non-product-specific programmes, the representative of 
Kazakhstan further explained that those programmes were administered at the republican and 
local levels and due to the reason that there was no unified system of data collection, Kazakhstan faced challenges with obtaining data disaggregated by types of agricultural products within those 
programmes from local authorities. 
986.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would apply subsidies on 
agricultural products in a manner consistent with WTO rules, including the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and Kazakhstan's co mmitments on domestic support and export 
subsidies contained in Kazakhstan's Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods (CLXXII) 
annexed to Kazakhstan's Protocol of Accession to the WTO.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment. 
987.   The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, upon accession, Kazakhstan would bind 
its agricultural export subsidies at zero in its Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods (CLXXII) and would not provide such subsidies in respect of agricultural products.  The Working 
Party took note of this commitment. 
988.  In implementing Article 6.2 of the WTO Agreem ent on Agriculture, the representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that while Kazakhstan could provide support through government measures of the types described in Article 6.2, the amount of such support would be included as non-exempt 
in Kazakhstan's calculation of its Current Total Aggregate Measurement of Support. 
The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that Kazakhstan would have recourse to a de 
minimis  exemption for product-specific support equivalent to 8.5 per cent of the total value of 
production of a basic agricultural product during the relevant year. The representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would have recourse to a de minimis exemption for 
non-product-specific support of 8.5 per cent of the value of Kazakhstan's total agricultural 
production during the relevant year.  Accordingly, these percentages would constitute 
Kazakhstan's de minimis exemption under Article 6.4 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture. She also noted that Kazakhstan's Total AMS Commitment Level was set forth in Part IV Section I of Kazakhstan's Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods (CLXXII). The Working Party 
took note of this commitment. 
989.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would participate fully in the 
Doha Development Agenda negotiating round and outcomes on agriculture, taking into account 
Kazakhstan's terms of accession to the WTO.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- Trade in Civil Aircraft 990.  Some Members asked Kazakhstan to commit to join the WTO Agreement on Trade in Civil 
Aircraft upon accession and to establish zero rates of tariff duty on imports of civil aircraft and 
parts.  These Members also requested that all internal taxes would be applied to the sale or lease of civil aircraft in a non-discriminatory fashion between such imported and domestically produced goods and between such goods imported from third countries.  Finally, they requested additional 
information on Kazakhstan's customs requirements for imported civil aircraft and parts, e.g., WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 231 - 
 
  import licensing, leasing, and tariff duties, particularly with regard to how Kazakhstan's 
participation in the EAEU might affect market access in Kazakhstan for such imported goods. 
991.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan did not plan to join the 
WTO Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft prior to its accession to the WTO.  Applied tariff duties 
and import licensing requirements corresponded to those laid out in the Common External Tariff 
(CET) of the EAEU and Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty.  Kazakhstan did not require licenses for 
imported civil aircraft and parts.  She explained that under the CET, Kazakhstan as well as other 
EAEU member States, currently applied 0% rate of customs duty on imports of certain types of 
aircrafts, including small aircrafts (i.e., thos e with fewer than 50 seats and weighing between 
2,000 kg and 20,000 kg), aircrafts with more than 300 seats, aircrafts with 50 seats to 300 seats and weight in the range of 90,000 kg to 120,000 kg, and large aircrafts (i.e., with weight 
exceeding 120,000 kg).  For imports of all other ty pes of civil aircrafts, Kazakhstan as well as 
other EAEU member States currently applied the CET of 20%.  The VAT of 12% was normally collected on aircraft purchases, both on those of EA EU origin or imports, except as provided below. 
992.  In addition, CU Commission Decision No . 331 "On Approval of the List of Goods 
Temporarily Imported with Conditional Exemptions from Payments of Customs Duties, Taxes and on Conditions of Such Exemptions, Including Time-Frames" of 18 June 2010 (hereinafter: CU 
Commission Decision No. 331) allowed temporary imports of aircrafts under HS tariff lines 8802 40 
003 2 and 8802 40 004 2 with 50 to 111 seats and 170 to 219 seats with conditional customs duty and tax (VAT) exemptions, provided that the following conditions were met:  (i) the importers concluded foreign trade contracts (e.g., leasing contracts); and, (ii) an aircraft was placed under 
the customs procedure of temporary importation until 31 December 2013 for a period not 
exceeding five years from this date.  CU Commis sion Decision No. 331 additionally allowed duty 
and tax-free importation of civil passenger aircrafts with no more than 19 passenger seats 
(HS tariff lines 8802 30 000 2 and 8802 40 001 1), owned by foreign persons and used for 
non-commercial flights within the EAEU customs territory. 
993.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that EEC Council Decision No. 6 of 
31 January 2014 introduced amendments to CU Commission Decision No. 331.  Civil passenger 
aircrafts under HS tariff lines 8802 40 003 5, 8802 40 003 6 and 8802 40 004 6 with 50 to 110 seats were added into the list of goods subject to temporary importation with conditional customs duty and tax exemptions, provided that contracts were concluded and aircrafts were placed under 
the customs procedure of temporary importation (access) until 1 January 2017.  The period for 
application of conditional customs duties and tax exemptions for these aircrafts was 5 years from the date of placing the aircrafts under the customs procedure of temporary importation (access).  
She further added that EEC Council Decision No. 20 of 4 March 2014 introduced amendments to 
CU Commission Decision No. 331 by adding civil freight aircrafts not equipped with loading ramp with maximum gross weight in the range of 60,000 kg to 80,000 kg (HS tariff line 8802 40 003 9) 
and more than 370,000 kg (HS tariff line 8802 40 009 6) placed under the customs procedure of 
temporary importation (access) until 31 December 2017, for the period of their temporary imports. 
994.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that in accordance with CU Commission Decision 
No. 130 "On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 (as last amended by EEC Council Decision No. 55 of 25 Se ptember 2013), customs duty exemptions were 
granted for civil passenger aircrafts under HS tariff lines 8802 40 003 5 and 8802 40 003 6 
imported for international and/or domestic flights on the territory of an EAEU member State, and/or flights on the territories of the EAEU member States: (i) with 50 to 300 passenger seats, 
which were imported to the Republic of Belarus an d Republic of Kazakhstan until 1 July 2014; (ii) 
with 110 to 300 passenger seats, determined in a ccordance with a type certificate, which were 
imported to the territory of the Republic of Belarus and the Republic of Kazakhstan until 31 December 2016; ( iii) with 110 to 300 passenger seats determined in accordance with the 
Layout of Passenger Accommodations (LOPA), which we re imported to the territory of the Republic 
of Belarus and the Republic of Kazakhstan fr om 1 January 2017 till 30 June 2019.  She further 
added that in accordance with EEC Council Decision No. 29 of 4 March 2014, customs duty 
exemptions were also granted for civil freight aircrafts under HS tariff line 8802 10 003 9 with 
maximum gross weight from 60,000 kg to 80,000 kg, imported to Kazakhstan until 31 December 2017. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 232 - 
 
  V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME 
- GENERAL - Industrial Property Protection 995.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan's policies in the area of intellectual 
property rights protection were aimed at: (i) bringing its legislation in line with international 
standards; (ii) developing relevant enforcement mechanisms; and, (iii) training experts in this area.  The objective of these policies was to ensu re the lawful use and protection of intellectual 
property rights in Kazakhstan, as set forth in the Concept of Protection of Intellectual Property 
Rights, approved by Government Resolution No. 1249 of 26 September 2001.   
996.  She added that legislation governing the protecti on of intellectual property rights included 
Civil Code (General Part) No. 269-XII of 27 December 1994 (hereinafter: Civil Code), Civil Code 
(Special Part) No. 409 of 1 July 1999 (hereinafter: Civil Code (Special Part)), Code of Civil 
Procedure  No. 411-I of 13 July 1999 (hereinafter: Code of Civil Procedure), Criminal Code No. 167-I of 16 July 1997 (hereinafter: Criminal Code), Code No. 155-II "On Administrative Offences" 
of 30  January 2001 (hereinafter: Code of Administrative Offences), Code No. 296-IV "On Customs 
Issues in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter: Customs Code of Kazakhstan),  
Law No. 6-I "On Copyright and Related Rights" of  10 June 1996 (hereinafter: Copyright Law), Law 
No. 456-I "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appella tions of Origin of Goods" of 26 July 1999 
(hereinafter: Trademark Law),  Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 (hereinafter: Patent Law), Law No. 422-I "On Protection of Selection Achievements" of 13 July 1999, and Law No. 217-II "On Legal Protection of Layout Design of Integrated 
Microcircuits" of 29 June 2001.  Law No. 586-II "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain 
Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan  on Intellectual Property" of 9 July 2004 had 
introduced changes to all principal legislation that regulated the protection of intellectual property 
rights in Kazakhstan.  In addition, Law No. 90-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain 
Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property" of 22 November 2005 had 
increased the administrative and criminal liability for violation of intellectual property rights and 
had improved and streamlined existing criminal procedures.  She added that Kazakhstan would 
continue to amend existing legislation and implement programmes to improve legal practices.  In an effort to improve inter-ministerial cooperation in this area, a number of joint orders had been adopted in September 2005.  These orders addressed coordination and collaboration 
procedures between the public prosecutor's offices, the financial police, the internal affairs bodies, 
customs, as well as the taxation and judicial bodies.   
997.  With regard to efforts made to educate the public on intellectual property rights, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the Ministry  of Justice regularly held regional and national 
workshops on protection of intellectual property rights in order to upgrade the qualifications of 
intellectual property rights protection experts, and to share experiences in this field.  Officials of 
the justice and customs bodies, judges, owners of intellectual property rights, as well as users and 
the media took part in these workshops.  She furt her noted that the Ministry of Justice conducted 
seminars jointly with international organizations, including the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the Coalition for Intellectual Property Rights (CIPR), the International 
Federation of Phonographic Industry (IFPI) an d the United States Agency for International 
Development (USAID).  In addition, officials of the Ministry of Justice actively participated in radio and television shows on protection of intellectual property rights in Kazakhstan.  Twice a year, the 
Ministry of Justice held the national campaign "Intellect".  This was the permanent large-scale 
campaign with the active participation of interested public bodies, international agencies, public associations, commercial organizations, educational institutions, the media, and the citizens of 
Kazakhstan.  The campaign aimed at promoting the concept of intellectual property, increasing the 
public's awareness of the need to take action against piracy and distribution of counterfeit 
products, and strengthening the role of intellectual property and the status of authors, innovators and inventors.   
998.  In addition, she noted that the number of app lications for registration of copyright and 
related rights, as well as of licence agreements for the use of copyright and related rights, had increased.  In her opinion, these developments demonstrated that the number of authors and 
persons aware of copyright and related laws had increased. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 233 - 
 
  - Responsible Agencies for Policy Formulation and Implementation 
999.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Ministry of Justice was authorized to 
perform specific executive, monitoring, and supervisory functions, as well as general administrative functions, in the area of intellec tual property, including copyrights, patents, and 
trademarks.  Earlier, these functions had been performed by the Committee on Intellectual 
Property Rights that had been abolished by Government Resolution No.933 "On Agencies of Central Bodies of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 14 August 2014.  She noted that the 
responsibility for evaluating, issuing, and promot ing the commercialization of industrial property 
rights had been delegated to the Republican State Enterprise "National Institute on Intellectual Property (NIIP)" of the Ministry of Justice.  The NIIP had been established by Government 
Resolution No. 756 "On the State Enterprise 'National Institute of Intellectual Property' of the 
Committee on Intellectual Property Rights of the Mi nistry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan" 
of 11 July 2002.  Its main task was to examine ap plications for intellectual property protection, 
including inventions, utility models, trademarks, appellations of origin (geographical indications), 
industrial designs and plant selection achievements.  It also kept the State Register of intellectual 
property protection documents (patents for inventions and certificates for trademarks and copyrights) and prepared them for issuance.  Th e NIIP also conducted scientific and research 
activities, and evaluated and promoted the commercialization of industrial property.  Through its 
Training Centre, it conducted training seminars on intellectual property protection and re-trained intellectual property protection specialists working at the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Education and Science, and the private sector.   
1000.  A Member requested additional information on how collecting societies were regulated by 
the Government of Kazakhstan and whether collecting societies must be accredited by the Government in order to operate in Kazakhstan.  This Member also asked whether collecting 
societies might represent/collect royalties for only a single exclusive right or for multiple exclusive 
rights and whether more than one collecting society might represent/collect for the same exclusive right.  This Member also inquired whether a collecting society might represent/collect for rights 
holders with whom a collective management agre ement had been concluded as well as for rights 
holders with whom a collective management agreement had not been concluded and how Kazakhstan ensured transparency and accountability in each collecting society's operations. 
1001.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Articles 43 through 47 of the Copyright Law 
addressed the collective management of intellectual property rights.  As provided in paragraph 1 of 
Article 43, authors had the right to establish organizations that managed intellectual property rights on a collective basis.  Under paragraph 3 of Article 43, authors could establish collecting 
societies that managed:  various rights for various categories of rights holders; various rights for a 
single category of right holder; or one type of right for various categories of rights holders.  
Articles 46 and 47 contained several transparency and accountability requirements, including the 
requirements to:  provide information on collection of royalties to rights holders; maintain a 
website containing information on collecting society and the rights that had been transferred to that organization; and provide such information to th e relevant regulatory authority.  In reply to a 
specific question, the representative of Kazakhst an clarified that collecting societies had to 
regularly report to all right holders they represented, whether directly or under reciprocal 
agreements, on any licenses granted, applicable tari ffs and royalties collected and distributed.  She 
further explained that the members collectively granted to such organizations their respective 
permission to use their works.  She further explained that these organizations 
represented/collected for rights holders with whom a collective management agreement had been concluded as well as for rights holders with whom a collective management agreement had not 
been concluded.  In response to a further question regarding representation of, or collection on 
behalf of right holders who did not have a collective management agreement, she explained that under paragraph 1 of Article 46-1, organizations had to obtain an accreditation certificate from the 
Government in order to represent/collect for rights holders with whom a collective management 
agreement had not been concluded.  Each collective rights management organization was required 
to report on a yearly basis on aspects of its op eration to the authorized body of the Government, 
including on auditing inspections, unclaimed royalties and other information specified in Article 47 
of the Copyright Law.  In addition, she clarif ied that this information could also include 
amendments made to the Charter and other docu ments of the collecting society; agreements 
concluded with foreign collecting societies; financial reports and names of the collecting society 
representatives.  She explained that currently nine non-governmental organizations, including the 
Kazakhstani Collecting Society for Performers, the Association of Producers of Phonograms, the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 234 - 
 
  Union of Producers and Performers "Demeu", the Performers of Kazakh Songs, the Kazakhstani 
Copyright Society, the Union of Songwriters, th e Copyright Society "Abyroi", the non-commercial 
Organization on Protection of Copyright and Rela ted Rights "Amanat", and the National Society on 
Reprographic Rights, acted as collecting societie s and specialized in copyright protection for 
composers, poets, writers, artists, scientists, journalists and other right holders.  She further noted 
that all rights holders, foreign and domestic, were covered equally by these provisions of the Copyright Law, and that several Kazakhstani collecting societies had reciprocal collecting 
arrangements with foreign collecting societies. 
- Participation in International In tellectual Property Agreements 
1002.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan was party to a number of 
international treaties, agreements, and conventions: notably, the Convention Establishing the 
World Intellectual Property Organization; the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial 
Property (hereinafter: Paris Convention); the Ma drid Agreement Concerning the International 
Registration of Marks; the Madrid Protocol Concerning the International Registration of Marks; the 
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT); the Patent La w Treaty (PLT); the Berne Convention for the 
Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (her einafter: Berne Convention); the Nice Agreement 
Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the 
Registration of Marks; the Strasbourg Agreement Concerning the International Patent 
Classification; the Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of Patent Proc edure; the Universal Copyright Convention; the 
Locarno Agreement Establishing an International Classification for Industrial Designs; the 
Trademark Law Treaty (TLT); the Eurasian Patent Co nvention; the Convention for the Protection of 
Producers of Phonograms Against Unauthorized Duplication of Their Phonograms; the Nairobi Treaty on the Protection of the Olympic Symbol ; the Rome Convention for the Protection of 
Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations (hereinafter: Rome 
Convention); and the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks.  In addition, Kazakhstan had acceded to the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty in 
April 2004.   
1003.  Asked specifically about Kazakhstan's participation in the Eurasian Patent Convention, she 
said that, by acceding to the Convention, Kazakhstan had not undertaken any obligations extending beyond the framework of the Paris Convention.   
1004.  She noted that Kazakhstan had bilateral cooperation agreements in the area of intellectual 
property with Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Re public, the Russian Federation, the United States 
and Uzbekistan.  The bilateral agreements with these countries and other CIS countries did not 
contain any specific obligations which would not be extended to other countries. 
1005.  The legal basis for the common principles of regulation in the sphere of protection of 
intellectual property rights within the EAEU was Section XXIII "Intellectual Property" and Annex 
No. 26 "Protocol on Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights" of the EAEU 
Treaty.  The EAEU Treaty fully reflected provisio ns of the Single Economic Space Agreement on 
Common Principles of Regulation in the Sphere of Protection of Intellectual Property Rights of 
9 December 2010 and had replaced it.  The main pr ovisions of the EAEU Treaty were based on the 
norms that were common for the national legislation of the EAEU member States in the field of 
intellectual property rights.  They included gene ral provisions, provisions on copyright and related 
rights, trademarks, appellations of origin (geographical indications), patents, selection 
achievements, layout designs of integrated circ uits and know-how, and enforcement.  The EAEU 
Treaty provided for the principle of regional exhaus tion of rights, under which the first sale of the 
goods marked with a protected trademark by its owner or with his/her consent exhausted any 
rights to the trademark for these given goods not only domestically, but within the whole region, 
and parallel imports within the region could no longer be opposed based on the rights to trademarks.  By EEC Collegium Decision No. 172 of 25 September 2012, the Eurasian Economic 
Commission (hereinafter: EEC or Commission) had created the Consultative Committee on 
Intellectual Property.  The main purposes of the Consultative Committee on Intellectual Property 
included elaboration of proposals for the EEC on the issues of protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights and organization of consultations with the representatives of the EAEU 
member States.  Specifically, the Consultative Committee on Intellectual Property participated in 
analysis of international agreements and national legislation of the EAEU member States; prepared proposals on harmonization and improvement of the national legislation; and assisted in WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 235 - 
 
  information exchange between the EEC, the author ized bodies of the EAEU member States and 
international organizations.  Meetings of the Consultative Committee on Intellectual Property were held as and when needed, but at least once in a half year period. 
1006.  A Member asked the question on the specific pr ovisions of the EAEU Treaty that related to 
copyright protection and enforcement and how the co pyright protection of the EAEU Treaty related 
to and interacted with Kazakhstan's national Copyright Law.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that Part II of Annex No. 26 to the EAEU Treaty contained provisions on 
copyright and related rights, which stipulated that the member States would secure protection of 
intellectual property based on the Berne Convention  and the Rome Convention.  Specific provisions 
could be found on copyrights; terms of protection; compound and derivative works; cinematographic works; related rights, including rights of performers and producers of 
phonograms; and, collective management organizati ons.  Part XIII of Annex No. 26 to the EAEU 
Treaty contained reference to the international treaty that was planned to be concluded among the member States in order to ensure coordination of member States on enforcement of intellectual 
property rights.  The EAEU Treaty was an international agreement that had a priority over the 
national legislation of Kazakhstan and could be directly applicable without adoption of national legislation on implementation of its provisions. 
1007.  In response to the question on the plans for intellectual property protection harmonization 
within the framework of the EAEU, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the EAEU member States intended to conclude the following agreements on intellectual property 
rights:  the Agreement on Trademarks, Service Mark s and Appellations of Origin at the Territories 
of the members States; the Agreement on Uniform Procedure for Collective Management of 
Copyright and Related Rights; and the Treaty on  Coordination of Enforcement of Intellectual 
Protection Rights.  Upon their ratification in Kazakhstan and the other EAEU member States, these 
Agreements would have a priority over the national legislation. 
- Application of National and MFN Treatment to Foreign Nationals 1008.  Some Members noted that Articles 3 and 4 of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related 
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (herei nafter: WTO TRIPS Agreement) provided that 
Members would accord national treatment and most-favoured-nation treatment (MFN), respectively, to each other's nationals with regard to the protection of intellectual property.  This protection included matters affecting the availability, acquisition, scope, maintenance and 
enforcement of intellectual property rights, as well as those matters specifically addressed in the 
WTO TRIPS Agreement.  These Members asked what provisions Kazakhstan had introduced to comply with these WTO provisions.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
paragraph 4 of Article 12 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, paragraph 7 of 
Article 3 of the Civil Code, Article 5 of the Copy right Law, Article 48 of the Trademark Law, and 
Article 38 of the Patent Law, ensured that fore ign natural and juridical persons were granted 
national treatment and most-favoured-nation trea tment with respect to the protection of their 
intellectual property rights in Kazakhstan.   
1009.  In reply to a specific question, she confirmed that any foreign right holder had the ability 
to directly apply for appellations of origin of goods (geographical indications) protection, without 
the intercession of its Government. 
- Fees and Taxes  
1010.  Some Members were concerned about nationals and non-nationals of Kazakhstan being 
charged different fees for the grant of certain in dustrial property rights and enquired how such 
differences could be justified considering that Kazakhstan's Constitution and Civil Code required that foreign natural and juridical persons be given national treatment.  In addition, some Members 
noted that nationals of the Russian Federation, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, and 
Uzbekistan could pay patent fees in Russian rubles or Kyrgyz soms, according to the schedule applicable to nationals of Kazakhstan, and did no t require the services of Kazakhstan's patent 
a t t o r n e y  w h e n  f i l i n g  a p p l i c a t i o n s  w i t h  t h e  M i n i s t r y  o f  J u s t i c e .   K a z a k h s t a n  w a s  a s k e d  h o w  i t  
intended to bring its legislation into conformity with the most-favoured-nation principle.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 236 - 
 
  1011.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, pursuant to the Order of the Minister of 
Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 368 of 18 December 2014, the new list of fees charged 
by the Republican State Enterprise "National Institute of Intellectual Property" had been adopted to remove any element of discrimination vis-à-vis  foreign right holders (provided in Annex 23 of 
this Report).  As for the treatment of Russian Federation and Kyrgyz Republic nationals, she 
replied that they could pay for patent fees only in Kazakhstani currency - tenge - as provided by the national legislation of Kazakhstan.  According to bilateral agreements concluded with the 
Russian Federation, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz  Republic, and Uzbekistan, their nationals were 
not required to use the services of a Kazakhstani patent attorney.  This was, in her view, in conformity with Article 4(d) of the TRIPS Agreement. 
1012.  One Member noted that Article 4(d) of the WTO TRIPS Agreement applied only to 
international agreements entered into force prior to entry into force of the WTO Agreement, i.e., 
on or before 1 January 1995.   
1013.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan, from the date of its 
accession to the WTO, would implement fully th e provisions of Articles 3 and 4 of the WTO 
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.  The Working Party took note 
of this commitment. 
- SUBSTANTIVE STANDARDS OF PROTECTION, INCLUDING PROCEDURES FOR THE 
ACQUISITION AND MAINTENANCE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
- Copyright and Related Rights 1014.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Copyright Law and the provisions of the 
Berne Convention (which applied directly pursuant to Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan) extended protection to literary, artistic and scientific works to incorporate all forms of copyright covered by the WTO TRIPS Agreement.   The protection included computer programs, 
computer operating systems and databases (defined as a collection of information).  Rental rights 
for musical works in the form of notes, phonog ram works, audio and visualworks, databases and 
computer software were stipulated in Article 16 of the Copyright Law.   
1015.  Article 28 of the Copyright Law provided a term of protection for the lifetime of the author 
and 70 years following his/her death, except in cases stipulated in the Article.  The copyright for a work first published within 30 years of the author's death was protected for 70 years after the publication date.  Works published anonymousl y or under a pseudonym were protected for 
70 years after the date of publication, unless th e author had been revealed.  The rights of 
performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasters were protected for 70 years from the date of performance/publication/broadcast.  Special terms for cinematographic and photographic works 
were not foreseen.   
1016.  Asked specifically about the protection of works that were still protected in their country of 
origin and that had not had a full term of protection in Kazakhstan, the representative of 
K a z a k h s t a n  r e p l i e d  t h a t  K a z a k h s t a n  e x t e n d e d  p r o t e c t i o n  t o  s u c h  w o r k s ,  a s  p r o v i d e d  f o r  i n  
Article 28 of the Copyright Law, unless they had be come available in the public domain in their 
country of origin.  Works with expired terms of protection fell into the public domain and were 
deemed to be national property that could be used free of charge by any person in accordance 
with Article 29 of the Copyright Law.   
1017.  A Member noted that the Copyright Law did not contain a clear provision on the protection 
of pre-existing works and sound recordings and requested more detail on Law No. 586-II "On 
Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts  of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual 
Property" of 9 July 2004 (hereinafter: Law No. 586-II), more specifically on its provisions addressing the protection of pre-existing works and sound recordings. 
1018.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Law No. 586-II had introduced retroactive 
protection procedures and other amendments to the Copyright Law and, specifically, amendments 
pertaining to the protection of pre-existing works. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 237 - 
 
  1019.  With regard to enforcement of copyrights, a Member urged the Government of Kazakhstan 
to increase the penalties for copyright piracy and impose penalties that were sufficient to act as an effective deterrent to potential pirates and counterfeiters.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, in her view, existing pe nalties were sufficiently strict.  However, her 
Government had adopted Law No. 90-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative 
Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property" of 22 November 2005 which provided for the enforcement of measures against the infringement of intellectual property rights and the 
illegal use of copyright.  Overall, 11 legislativ e acts had been amended, including the Criminal 
Code (paragraph 1 of Article 184) and the Code of Administrative Offences (Articles 128, 129 and 145).  These amendments introduced the categories  of "selection achievements" and "integrated 
circuit layouts"; defined such types of infringement as illegal acquisition, storage or hauling of 
counterfeit copies of works and phonograms; doubled applicable penalties, the maximum penalty 
being five years of imprisonment; introduced meas ures against recurring offences; and, authorized 
seizure of equipment used for production of counterfeit products.   
1020.  The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that, in 2009, the Copyright Law had 
been amended in order to bring it into complia nce with the WIPO's Copyright Treaty and the 
Performances and Phonograms Treaty, and the term  "technological measure" had been introduced 
into the Law.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that, in 
accordance with the 2009 amendments, "technological measure" was understood as technology (programme technology) or its components that controlled access to copyright works or objects of related rights and prevented or restricted actions prohibited by the author, owner of related rights, 
or other owner of exclusive copyright or related rights.   
1021.  A Member noted that sub-paragraph 39 of Arti cle 2 of the Copyright Law defined a "work 
of amateur and folk arts" as "a work including peculiar elements of traditional art heritage (folk 
fairy tales, folk poetry, folk songs, instrumental folk music, folk dances and plays, artistic forms of 
folk traditions, etc.)".  This Member asked whether these were works intended to be included within Article 6 ("Objects of Copyright General Provisions") of the Copyright Law, and whether 
these works were excluded under paragraph 3 of Ar ticle 8 ("Works of Folklore") of the Copyright 
Law.  This Member also inquired whether works of amateur and folk arts were protected under other laws and, if so, asked the representative of Kazakhstan to describe the scope and nature of such protection. 
1022.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that "works of amateur and folk arts", as defined 
by sub-paragraph 39 of Article 2 of the Copyrigh t Law, were not protected by copyright or other 
laws of Kazakhstan.  To be a "work of amateur and folk art" excluded from copyright protection 
under paragraph 3 of Article 8 of the Copyright Law, this work would not have had an author(s), 
but instead would have been created by a community.  Anonymous works and works created under a pseudonym had an author; only works created by a community were not protected under 
sub-paragraph 39 of Article 2 and paragraph 3 of Ar ticle 8 of the Copyright Law.  Derivative works 
using an underlying work of amateur or folk arts, like derivative works using other public domain works, would be protected as independent works under paragraph 3 of Article 7 of the Copyright 
Law.  For example, a musical composer who created an arrangement of a work of amateur and 
folk art would have that arrangement protected by paragraphs 1(5) of and 3(1) of Article 7 under 
the Copyright Law.  Likewise, sound recordings, audio-visual works and other fixations of works covered by sub-paragraph 39 of Article 2 would be protected under the Copyright Law.  
Performers/producers/broadcasting organizations had the rights enumerated in Chapter III 
"Related Rights" of the Copyright Law to fixations of works of amateur and folk arts.  Works that could arguably fall under the folklore definition of sub-paragraph 39 of Ar ticle 2 of the Copyright 
Law, but which were protected as copyrighted works in the country of origin, would be protected 
as copyrighted works in Kazakhstan.   
1023.  A Member noted that a number of terms used in the Copyright Law were unclear and 
asked the representative of Kazakhstan to explain their meanings.  In particular, this Member 
requested a clarification of the meaning of the terms "cite" and "citation" in paragraph 1(1) of 
Article 19 of the Copyright Law  and the meaning of the term "training nature" in paragraph 1(2) of Article 19 of this Law.  A Member also aske d Kazakhstan to clarify the meaning of the term 
"information purposes" in paragraph 1(3) of Article 41.   
1024.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the terms "cite" and "citation" in 
paragraph 1(1) of Article 19 of the Copyright Law meant "quotation" as used in Article 10(1) of the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 238 - 
 
  Berne Convention.  The term "training nature" in paragraph 1(2) of Article 19 of the Copyright Law 
meant "teaching" as used in Article 10(2) of the Berne Convention.  She noted that the term "information purposes" in paragraph 1(3) of Ar ticle 41 of the Copyright Law meant "to report 
events that are expected to occur in the near future" and "to report recent historical events".  
She added that the term "current events" in paragraph 1(1) of Article 41 of the Copyright Law 
meant "an event that is occurring at the present time, e.g., a live report".   
1025.  A Member noted that Article 41 of the Copyright Law referred to the use of certain works 
without authorization or payment and asked Kazakhstan to clarify what was meant by 
"exclusively" in paragraph 1(2) of Article 41.   
1026.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the term "exclusively" in paragraph 1(2) 
of Article 41 of the Copyright Law meant "s olely" as used in Article 15(1)(d) of the 
Rome Convention. 
- Trademarks, including Service Marks 1027.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that  with the adoption of the Trademark Law, 
Kazakhstan had ensured that all requirements of  Articles 15-24 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement had 
been taken into account.  Other relevant legislation included Order of the acting Minister of Justice 
No. 136 of 23 April 2010 adopting the "Instruction on Acknowledgement of Trademark (Service 
Mark) as Well-Known" that stipulated the rules for filing, submission and processing of applications 
for the registration of a trademark.  In addi tion, some changes and amendments to bring the 
Trademark Law in full compliance with the WTO TRIPS Agreement had been introduced in 2004 
and 2007.  She also noted that the terms of th e Paris Convention, specifically Articles 6 bis and 
10bis, were directly applicable pursuant to Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan. 
1028.  She added that the Trademark Law accorded trad emark protection to all pictorial, verbal, 
letter, digital, volumetric and other designations or their combinations that allowed a person to 
distinguish the goods and services of one manufactu rer from those of another.  Signs could not be 
registered if they were identical, or confusingly similar to those already protected, or when they 
had become generally accepted symbols.  Pursuant to paragraph 3(1) of Article 6 of the 
Trademark Law, signs that were false or could mislead the public about the product or its manufacturer, including geographical indications th at could mislead the public about the product's 
place of production, could not be registered.  Al l well-known trademarks (for goods and services) 
were protected without any restrictions.  She held the view that these provisions were in 
compliance with Article 16 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement.   
1029.  Protection of trademarks was provided on th e basis of registration and issuance of a 
trademark certificate by the Ministry of Justice and was available to all owners of well-known 
trademarks, regardless of whether or not their trademark rights were registered in Kazakhstan.  The registration of a trademark could be contested and deemed invalid, in full or in part, and the 
owner of a well-known trademark could petition in Kazakhstan's courts for recognition of the mark 
as well-known and to prevent its continued unauthori zed use.  The owner bore the burden of proof 
to establish that the trademark was "well-known"  and was required to demonstrate this on the 
basis of public-opinion poll (survey) results.  In  addition to survey results, the authorities could 
also consider information on the extent of use of  the trademark in Kazakhstan, the methods of its 
use, the sales volume and the marketing outlets; information about the average annual number of consumers, the value of the trademark, the extent of advertising of the trademark, and the extent 
of initial or acquired distinctiveness of the trademark; and information about the trademark's use 
or a similar trademark by third parties, the numbe r of licenses, and the trademark's registration 
abroad.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that in order to 
comply with the requirement of Article 16 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement and determine the degree 
of knowledge of the trademark in the relevant sector of the public, Kazakhstan took public opinion results into account.  In addition, the owner was allowed to use other means to demonstrate that the trademark was well-known, including those mentioned in the WIPO Joint Recommendations on 
the Protection of Well-Known Marks.  Accordin g to Article 2 of these Recommendations, the 
competent authority could consider:  (i) the degree of knowledge or recognition of the mark in the relevant sector of the public; (ii) the duration, extent and geographical area of any use of the 
mark; (iii) the duration, extent and geographical area of any promotion of the mark, including 
advertising or publicity and the presentation, at fa irs or exhibitions, of the goods and/or services WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 239 - 
 
  to which the mark applied; (iv) the duration and geographical area of any registrations, and/or any 
applications for registration, of the mark, to the extent that they reflected use or recognition of the mark; (v) the record of successful enforcement of ri ghts in the mark, in particular, the extent to 
which the mark was recognized as well-known by competent authorities; and, (vi) the value 
associated with the mark. 
1030.  The period of validity of an initial registration and each renewal of registration of a 
trademark was 10 years.  The registration of a trademark was renewable indefinitely.  Any person 
could file for a cancellation of a trademark to the Board of Appeal of the Ministry of Justice after 
three years of non-use.  However, trademark owners could submit evidence to demonstrate that non-use had occurred due to circumstances beyond their control.   
1031.  Asked whether a trademark could be assigned with or without the goodwill of a company, 
the representative of Kazakhstan replied that a ssigning trademark rights entailed transferring of 
the trademark itself, when used with certain produc ts or services, as well as transferring of the 
trademark's business reputation (goodwill) that had been gained through its use.  Pursuant to the 
Trademark Law, the owner of a registered tradem ark (licensor) could license the right to use a 
registered trademark to another party (licensee).  For licensing rights to a trademark, a written agreement had to contain provisions stipulating that the quality of goods associated with the 
licensee's use of the trademark had not been inferior to that of the licensor's, as well as provisions 
stipulating the licensor's right to supervise complian ce with the terms of the agreement.  Licensing 
and assignment agreements had to be registered with the Ministry of Justice.  Asked about any 
possible negative effects of the registration procedure for such agreements, she clarified that 
official registration of agreements with the Ministry implied that the rights of a person, to whom 
the rights for industrial property were assigned , had not been infringed in any way, and in the 
event the other party requested to make further changes to the agreement, such changes could 
only be made by court decision.  In her view, the provisions of the Trademark Law met the 
requirements of Article 6 quater  of the Paris Convention. 
1032.  A Member questioned the value of the mandatory licence recording, in particular as it could 
affect the rights of legitimate trademark owners.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan 
said that the mandatory licence recording procedure protected the rights of intellectual property owners and, as such, was in compliance with Article 21 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement.   
1033.  In reply to the specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that according 
to Article 6 of the Trademark Law, registration of generic names was not allowed.  Such names 
could be used as unprotected elements of a trademark if they were not predominant. 
- Geographical Indications, including Appellations of Origin 
1034.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that , according to the Trademark Law, the term 
"appellation of origin" was equal to the term "geographical indication" as used in the WTO TRIPS Agreement.  Appellations of origin (geographical indications) could be registered if they 
denominated a product with specific qualities which were mainly or exclusively associated with its 
place of origin (including natural conditions and/or human factors).  Only appellations of origin (geographical indications) associated with a particular product could be registered.  The registration certificate entitled the owner to the right to use the appellation of origin for the 
goods listed in the certificate.  Registration of appellations of origin (geographical indications) was 
prohibited when it could mislead consumers about the place of origin, or when registration could 
infringe upon the rights of third parties.  Appellations of origin (geographical indications) which 
were false, identical, confusingly similar, or cl early misled consumers about the product's place of 
origin, were not protected.  In reply to a specific question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that registration of the appellation of origin (geographical indication) which, 
although literally true as to the place in which the goods originated, falsely represented to the 
public that the goods originated in another territory, was also not allowed.  She added that the Trademark Law provided for the protection of wines and spirits as required under Articles 22 and 23 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement.  Asked whether geographical indications were protected 
against unfair competition, she referred to Articles 16 and 17 of Law No. 112-IV "On Competition" 
of 25 December 2008 (hereinafter: Competition Law).    WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 240 - 
 
  1035.  Applications for protection of appellations of origin (geographical indications) were filed 
with the National Institute on Intellectual Property Rights (NIIP) and included: (i) a single name  (composed of one or more words) indicating the place of origin of a good; (ii) the name and address of the applicant(s); (iii) the good's designation; and, (iv) the type of product for which 
appellation of origin (geographical indication) registration was sought, including its place of 
manufacture and/or natural occurrence and a descript ion of the specific properties of the good.  
In addition to the above, foreigners had to submit applications through a patent attorney along 
with a document confirming the authority of the patent attorney to act on behalf of the applicant.  
National applicants had to provide a statement from the relevant local administrative body certifying that the applicant resided on its territory  and that the quality of goods originating therein 
was associated with the natural conditions and/or human factors of that particular geographical 
area.  Similarly, foreign applicants had to accompany their applications by a document attesting 
the applicant's right to use the appellation of origin (geographical indication) in their country of origin (paragraph 3(3) of Article 29 of the Tradem ark Law).  In reply to the specific question, the 
representative of Kazakhstan clarified that proof of registration in the country of origin could 
qualify for this requirement.  Besides, Kazakhstan would accept certification mark registration, or other evidence of use and control of the term, as long as it demonstrated that the appellation of 
origin (geographical indication) was protected in the country of origin.  In the view of 
representative of Kazakhstan, provisions stipulating these requirements did not create any preconditions to use them in such a way as to raise national treatment and MFN concerns. 
1036.  One Member noted that a provision specifying that foreigners had to submit applications 
through a patent attorney could read like a discrim inatory treatment of foreigners and questioned 
whether domestic nationals had to use the services  of a patent attorney.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that domestic nationals were not required to recourse to a patent attorney.  
In her opinion, it could be justified within the WTO accession since Kazakhstan did not take any 
commitments with regard to services of patent attorneys in accordance with its Schedule of Specific Commitments on Services.  Moreover, pa ragraph 3 of Article 2 of the Paris Convention 
(reflected in paragraph 2 of Article 3 of the WT O TRIPS Agreement on exceptions) provided that:  
"the provisions of the laws of each of the countries  of the Union relating to [...] the appointment of 
an agent, which may be required by the laws on  industrial property, were expressly reserved". 
1037.  Some Members continued to have concerns that the requirement for foreigners to use a 
patent attorney was contrary to the MFN provis ions of the WTO TRIPS Agreement and asked for 
establishment of non-discriminatory treatment in this matter.  In reply, the representative of 
Kazakhstan agreed that this requirement had to ap ply in accordance with the MFN provision of the 
WTO TRIPS Agreement.  In this regard bilate ral agreements concluded with Uzbekistan, the 
Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan and Georgia had to be revised in order to exclude preferential 
provisions allowing their nationals to submit applications without recourse to a patent attorney.  
Kazakhstan confirmed that it did not have any non-MFN arrangements with any other 
CIS countries or EAEU member States in the area of intellectual property protection. 
1038.  In reply to a specific question the representative of Kazakhstan said that, in terms of 
applications which had to be made through patent attorneys, "foreigners" had to be understood as 
"non-residents" of the Republic of Kazakhstan as defined in Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008. 
1039.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify whether, in order to have a geographical indication 
protected, it had to be registered in Kazakhstan.  This Member noted that such a provision would be in conflict with Article 22.2 of the WTO TRIP S Agreement, which set an obligation for Members 
to provide legal protection regardless of registration.   
1040.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  paragraph 2 of Article 37 of the Trademark 
Law prohibited the use of unregistered appellations of origin (geographical indications) that were identical or similar to registered ones, where such use would result in confusion.  Such protection 
of appellations of origin (geographical indications) in Kazakhstan could be provided only through 
registration, which could be made on the basis of a document proving that an appellation of origin 
(geographical indication) was protected in the country of origin.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
also added that, in her view, registration was sufficient legal means for interested parties to 
prevent illegal use of appellations of origin (geographical indications) as required under Article 22.2 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement.  According to Articles 16 and 17 of the Competition WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 241 - 
 
  Law, illegal use of another person's appellation of origin (geographical indication) for similar goods 
was recognized as unfair use of appellation of origin (geographical indication) in Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that an y interested party could challenge the illegal 
registration in Kazakhstan or use in Kazakhstan of another person's appellation of origin 
(geographical indication).  To challenge the illegal registration in Kazakhstan or use in Kazakhstan 
of another person's appellation of origin (geographical indication), an interested party was not required to provide either proof of registration of  an appellation of origin (geographical indication) 
in Kazakhstan or proof of use of an appellation of origin (geographical indication) in Kazakhstan.   
1041.  A Member raised a concern that Articles 16 and 17 of the Competition Law limited the 
scope of protection of Article 22 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement to cases where a specific geographical indication was illegally used for "similar goods".  A Member asked for clarification 
concerning the protection granted to geographic al indications according to the legislation of 
Kazakhstan implementing Article 22 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement and in particular to know whether this protection applied to any kind of pr oducts.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied 
that Article 27 of the Trademark Law fully impl emented the provisions of Article 22 of the WTO 
TRIPS Agreement providing that the following design ations could not be registered as appellations 
of origin (geographical indications):  (i) represen ting the names of geographical objects (i.e., an 
indication that identified a product originating from a particular territory, region or locality) in a 
manner that misled the public as to the geographical origin of the goods; (ii) those that, although literally true as to the territory in which the goods originated, falsely represented to the public that the goods originated in another territory; and, (iii) containing names of geographical objects not 
related to the place of origin of the goods.  Therefore, Article 27 contained legal means of 
protection that were not limited to the specif ic type of goods designated by the relevant 
geographical indication.  Articles 16 and 17 of the Competition Law implemented provisions of 
Article 22.2(b) of the WTO TRIPS Agreement, which required Parties to prevent any use which 
constituted an act of unfair competition within the meaning of Article 10 bis of the 
Paris Convention. 
1042.  A Member was concerned that Kazakhstan would not be providing national treatment to 
the nationals of WTO Members and would also be de nying MFN treatment to at least some of those 
Members, if a bilateral agreement was required in order to obtain protection for foreign geographical indications.   
1043.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, pursuant to Article 48 of the 
Trademark Law, foreign natural and juridical persons had the same rights and obligations as nationals of Kazakhstan, unless otherwise provided in Kazakhstan's legislation.  In particular, 
foreigners could apply directly for protection of appellations of origin (geographical indications) in 
Kazakhstan without the need for a bilatera l agreement or government intervention.  
1044.  Asked whether earlier protected trademarks would be protected from confusingly similar 
and later-in-time geographical indications, she said that Kazakhstan had developed a draft 
Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property" which amended paragraph 3 of Article 39of the Trademark Law.  According to the new amendments, the registration of an appellation of origin (geographical indication) could 
be contested and invalidated if it was likely to cause confusion for consumers as to the true 
identity of the good or its manufacturer due to th e existence of an earlier-in-time trademark which 
had become renown/well known in Kazakhstan due to its active use, including its promotion or its 
use in advertisements.  The amendments represented limited exceptions to trademark rights 
because they provided for coexistence only in th e cases where the likelihood of confusion between 
the trademark and appellation of origin (geographical indication) was low.  In cases where the 
likelihood of confusion was high, registration of appellation of origin (geographical indication) could 
be challenged in the court by the interested third parties. 
1045.  A Member raised a concern that by referring to the possibility to invalidate a protected 
geographical indication, paragraph 1044 of this Re port seemed, however, to suggest that owners 
of trademarks containing geographical indications could not only contest later applications for 
geographical indication registration but also re quire the invalidation of a protected geographical 
indication.  
1046.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that paragraph 1044 of this Report as 
well as the amendments made to the Trademar k Law suggested the possibility to contest and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 242 - 
 
  invalidate registration of the appellation of origin (geographical indication) in certain 
circumstances, specifically if it could mislead cons umers as to the true identity of the good or its 
manufacturer due to the existence of an earlier- in-time trademark which had become renown/well 
known in Kazakhstan due to its active use, including its promotion or its use in advertisements.  
The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in practice the possibility to contest and 
invalidate registration of the geographical in dication existed for a pending application and a 
registered geographical indication. 
1047.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that 
interpretation of "low" and "high" degree of the likelihood of confusion had to be made by the court in each case individually on the basis of such criteria as a renowned/well known trademark in Kazakhstan, acquired due to its active use.  The time period limitation to contest and invalidate 
registration of appellation of origin (geographical indication) due to the existence of an earlier-in-
time trademark was five years from the moment of publication of the information on the State registration of the appellation of origin (geographical indication) in the official bulletin.  
1048.  With regard to subsequent registration of trademarks, the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that according to Article 23 of the Trademark Law, it could be contested and invalidated during five years after the registration.  Bad faith registrations could be opposed without any 
limitations in time.  According to paragraph 1(1) of Article 42 of the Trademark Law, disputes on 
legality of the certificates confirming the registration of trademark or appellation of origin (geographical indication) were subject to consideration in court.  
1049.  Asked to clarify if active use included use outside of Kazakhstan, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that according to paragraph 4 of Article 19 of the Trademark Law, manufacture, 
importation, storage, offering for sale, sale of goods with a trademark, its use in advertising, billboards, printed publications, on official le tterhead or other business document, transfer of 
trademark rights or its demonstration at exhibitions held in the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as 
other introduction into civil circulation, were reco gnized as use of a trademark.  Therefore, active 
use included also use outside of Kazakhstan.  Taking into account that trademark must be 
renowned/well known in Kazakhstan, it had to be  actively used in Kazakhstan as well.   
1050.  With respect to the statement that the trademark had to be actively used in Kazakhstan, a 
Member pointed out that Article 16.2 of the WT O TRIPS Agreement indicated that use in other 
States was sufficient.  In response the representati ve of Kazakhstan stated that the term "use" in 
paragraph 3 of Article 39 of the Trademark La w had the same meaning and, in her view, its 
definition in Article 19 of the Trademark Law covered the concept of promotion in the sense of Article 16 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement.  The competent authority considered whether a mark had 
been used intensively taking into account, inter alia , the advertising budget (proved by annual 
financial reports), the degree of familiarity of the mark to customers, and the information on countries where the mark was renowned/well known. 
1051.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that traditional non-geographical names 
could be protected as appellations of origin (geogr aphical indications) in Kazakhstan, if they were 
protected as appellations of origin (geographical indications) in their country of origin. 
- Industrial Designs 
1052.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that th e rights of industrial designs were regulated 
by the Patent Law and certified only by patents, provided that the applied industrial design met 
patentability requirements, such as novelty and originality.  The "industrial applicability" criterion, 
i.e., the possibility to industrially reproduce the industrial design, was the main criterion for an 
industrial design.  Architectural objects (except for small architectural forms), industrial, hydraulic engineering and other stationary constructions were  not recognized as industrial designs because 
they did not meet the "industrial applicability" criterion.  However, these constructions qualified for 
copyright protection.  Artistic-design solutions that determined the exterior of a product, textile goods, as well as small architectural forms were considered to be industrial designs according to Article 8 of the Patent Law.  Small architectural forms recognized as industrial designs included 
solutions that determined the exterior of different stands, tents or exhibition pavilions that could 
be reproduced serially.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 243 - 
 
  1053.  She added that an industrial design patent was valid for 15 years as of the date of 
application.  Industrial design patent could be ex tended upon request of the owner for a period of 
up to five years.  The owner of an industrial de sign patent had the exclusive right to its use.  
A person other than the patent owner could use the protected industrial design only by permission 
of the patent owner and under a licence agreemen t subject to compulsory registration with the 
Ministry of Justice. 
- Patents 
1054.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, in her view, the Patent Law,as amended by 
Law No. 237-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property" of 2 March 2 007, met all the provisions of Articles 25-34 of 
the WTO TRIPS Agreement.  The Patent Law covered inventions, industrial designs and utility 
models and stipulated an expanded list of ways for protecting the rights of patent owners.  
An invention was granted legal protection if it was new, involved an inventive step and was industrially applicable.  Paragraph 2 of Article 6, of the Patent Law provided an exhaustive list of 
subject matter that could be patented as an invention, including a device, process, substance, 
microorganism strain or culture of plant or animal cells, as well as the use of a known device, process, substance or strain for a new purpose.  Diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods 
could also be protected as inventions under the Article 6 criteria.  The Patent Law did not recognize 
as inventions: (i) discoveries; (ii) scientific theories; (iii) mathematical methods; (iv) methods of economic organization and management; (v) symbols, schedules, and rules; (vi) rules and methods for mental activities; (vii) algorithms per se  and computer programs; (viii) projects and 
plans of buildings and structures, and land deve lopment; (ix) proposals concerning solely the 
outward appearance of manufactured goods; and, (x ) proposals that were contrary to the public 
interest, humanitarian principles and morality.  Paragraph 2 of Article 11 of the Patent Law 
stipulated the requirement that a patented in vention be used, while "use" was defined as 
manufacturing, application, importation, offer for sale, sale, as well as other means of putting the industrial property into circulation, including storage in view of subsequent use.  The provisions of 
the Patent Law applied equally to both foreign and Kazakhstan's natural and juridical persons, in 
accordance with signed international agreements or the reciprocity principle.   
1055.  Some Members expressed concern regarding the exclusion of computer programs from 
patentable subject matter.  They explained that co mputer programs, for example, could be part of 
a patentable process for making or using products.  These Members asked for a clarification of 
whether such computer programs could be patented under Kazakhstan's Patent Law. 
1056.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that patent protection in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan could be provided under a full patent and an innovation patent.  
The degree of protection provided by an innovati on patent was functionally equivalent to that 
provided by a full patent.  The principal differe nce concerned the procedure for issuing patents and 
the validity period.  Innovation patents could be  issued after examination of an application for 
industrial applicability and local novelty of an invention, and were valid for a period of three years.  Full patents were issued after conducting a substantive examination of the patent application, provided that the application for a full patent was filed within three years of filing an application for 
an innovation patent with the Ministry of Ju stice.  The substantive examination included 
verification of the patentability conditions of the innovation (novelty, originality and industrial application).  The full patent was valid for a period of 20 years starting from the date of initial 
application.  If, however, the innovation patent holder did not submit an application for an 
extension of the patent or for conducting a full examination within the prescribed period, the innovation patent was cancelled as of the date of its expiration (i.e., three years from the date of 
application).  The validity of an innovation pate nt could be extended upon the request of the 
patent holder for up to two years.   
1057.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that utility models were granted patent protection 
if they met the patentability requirements, including novelty and industrial applicability.  
Utility model patents were granted for a period of five years, subject to subsequent renewal at the 
request of the patent owner for a period not exceeding three years.  Exclusive rights to use protected utility models and what constituted an infringement of such rights were identical to the 
rights provided to patented inventions and indust rial designs, and infringements of such rights. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 244 - 
 
  1058.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan excluded the patentability of "proposals that were 
contrary to the public interest, humanitarian principles and morality".  This Member was concerned that this language was broader than the permissi ble exceptions provided in Article 27.2 of the 
WTO TRIPS Agreement.  This Member also expressed concerns regarding the exclusion from 
patentability of "methods of economic organization" and "computer programs". 
1059.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in excluding the patentability of 
"proposals that were contrary to the public interest, humanitarian principles and morality", 
Kazakhstan intended to cover only the exclusions for " ordre public " and "morality" provided for in 
Article 27.2 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement.  As for the exclusion from the patentability of "methods 
of economic organization", she said that, according to paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Patent Law, only technical solutions were protected as inventions.  Methods of economic organization were not 
recognized as inventions because of their non-technical character.   
1060.  A Member continued to have concerns regarding the scope of exceptions permitted under 
Article 6 of the Patent Law and requested that Kazakhstan amend the Law to comply with the 
requirements of Article 27.2 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement. 
1061.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at Article 6 of Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 was am ended to comply with Article 27.2 of the WTO 
Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Ri ghts, by replacing the term "public interests, 
principles of humanity and morality" with " ordre public " and "morality" in the text of Law No. 427-I 
"Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
also confirmed that an invention, such as a process, that includes a computer program was 
patentable subject matter under Kazakhstan's Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
1062.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide an explanation of how the compulsory licensing 
provisions of the Patent Law complied with th e requirements of Article 31(a)-(l) of the WTO 
TRIPS Agreement.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that pursuant to paragraph 1 of 
Article 11 of the Patent Law, the patent holder  had the exclusive right to use the protected 
invention.  The unauthorized use of a protected invention was deemed to infringe the exclusive 
rights of the patent owner.  Protected inventions could only be used by obtaining the patent holder's authorization under a licensing agreement,  subject to compulsory registration with the 
Ministry of Justice or under a compulsory licence granted pursuant to Article 11 of the Patent Law.  
Pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 11 of the Patent Law, any person could apply to the court for a 
compulsory non-exclusive licence if, prior to the application, efforts to obtain authorization from the right holder on reasonable commercial terms an d over a reasonable time period, had failed.  
An interested party could also file an application requesting a compulsory licence if uninterrupted 
non-use had occurred for a period of four consecutive years, provided that the applicant presented evidence of non-use.  The court would issue a co mpulsory licence, specifying the term and scope 
of use, as well as terms, amount and conditions  of payment, unless the patent owner could prove 
that non-use had been due to valid reasons.  Th e compulsory licence would be non-exclusive and 
the amount of payment could not be lower than the market price of the licence.  As for the requirements of Article 31(l) of the WTO TRIPS Ag reement, pursuant to paragraph 5 of Article 11 
of the Patent Law, the patent holder could apply to the court requesting a compulsory licence if the 
exploitation of his/her patent was not possible without infringing another patent, and efforts to obtain authorization from the right holder of this patent had failed.  The court could issue a 
compulsory licence specifying the term and scope of its use, as well as the terms, amount and 
conditions of payment.  The payment could not be  less than the market price of the licence.  
A Member raised concerns regarding paragraph 5 of Article 11of Kazakhstan's Patent Law.  In this 
Member's view, paragraph 5 of Article 11 did not include the requirement of the WTO 
TRIPS Agreement that the second patent be an im portant technical advance.  This Member also 
noted that Kazakhstan's Patent Law did not appear to limit the purpose for which a compulsory licence for semi-conductor technology could be granted, as required under Article 31(c) of the 
WTO TRIPS Agreement.  This Member asked that Kazakhstan bring its compulsory licensing for 
patents into conformity with Article 31 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement. 
1063.  Asked specifically how Kazakhstan's Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 addressed the issue of "use" or "non-use" in terms of imported 
patented products, the representative of Kazakhst an confirmed that paragraph 2 of Article 11 of 
Kazakhstan's Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of the Re public of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 provides WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 245 - 
 
  that, in the case of importation of a patented product, non-use could not be established under 
Kazakhstan's Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of th e Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999.  
In addition, prior to the date of its accession , Article 11 of Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 would be amended to ensure that where use of the 
subject matter of a patent was authorized to permit the exploitation of a patent (second patent) 
which could not be exploited without infringing another patent (first patent), the invention claimed in the second patent must involve an important technical advance of considerable economic 
significance in relation to the invention claimed in the first patent, as provided for in Article 31(l) of 
the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Inte llectual Property Rights.  Similarly, Article 11 
would be amended to limit the purposes for which a compulsory licence for patented semi-conductor technology could be granted in order to comply with Article 31(c) of the WTO 
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.  The Working Party took note 
of these commitments. 
1064.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that pursuant to Article 12 of the Patent Law, the 
following were not considered to constitute a violation of the exclusive right of a patent holder:  
(i) application of a patent in foreign transportation vehicles which were present on the territory of Kazakhstan temporarily (or by accident), provid ed the patent was used for the needs of the 
vehicles; (ii) research or experimentation conducted on an object containing a patent; (iii) 
application of a patent in emergency situations (natural and other disasters, major accidents) with immediate notification of the patent holder  and subsequent payment of corresponding 
compensation to the patent holder; (iv) application of a patent for personal needs without a 
commercial purpose; and, (v)  one-time preparatio n of prescription medicine.  The aforementioned 
provisions met, in her view, the requirements of Article 30 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement.   
1065.  Asked specifically how Kazakhstan's law addressed the need to balance acceptable private 
use with the need to prevent "unreasonable pr ejudice to the rights of patent owners", 
the representative of Kazakhstan replied that use of protected objects of industrial property was not considered as a violation of the patent holder's rights only in exceptional cases when this use 
was limited to private or personal purpose.  In addition, personal use of protected objects had to 
be non-commercial.  Taking into account that a patent provided a monopoly to the right holder over commercial activity, but did not extend so far as to cover non-commercial activity, such use of patented inventions did not, in her view, unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the 
right holder.   
1066.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to bring paragrap hs 2 and 4 of Article 12 of the Patent Law 
into compliance with the requirements of Article 30 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement, i.e., that these 
provisions would constitute limited exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by a patent, 
provided that such exceptions did not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent and did not unreasonably prejudice the legi timate interests of the patent owner, taking 
account of the legitimate interests of third parties. 
1067.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that prior to the date of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO, paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article 12 of Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 would be amended to bring Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 into co mpliance with the requirements of Article 30 of 
the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.  Specifically, 
paragraph 2 of Article 12 would be amended to indicate that the following was not an infringement 
of the exclusive rights of a patent holder: "carry ing out scientific research or experiment on means 
which contain the protected object of industrial property when such research or experiment does not have a commercial purpose".  Paragraph 4 of Article 12 of Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 would be am ended to indicate that utilization of a patent 
without the authorization of the patent holder for the satisfaction of personal, family, home, or other needs not connected with entrepreneurial acti vity would be permitted if the purpose of such 
utilization was not financial gain.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
1068.  With regard to reversal of the burden of proof in civil proceedings concerning the 
infringement of process patents, she said th at the requirements of Article 34 of the WTO 
TRIPS Agreement were not covered by the Patent Law, but were contained in Article 65 of the Civil 
Procedure Code, which stipulated that each party was responsible for providing proof for its own 
claims and statements.  Other parties involved in the process could also provide evidence. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 246 - 
 
  - Plant Variety Protection 
1069.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that new varieties of plants and animals were 
protected in accordance with Law No. 422-I "On Protection of Selection Achievements" of 13 July 1999.  This Law was awarded a positive legal opinion by the International Union for the Protection 
of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) for its conformity with the International Convention for the 
Protection of New Varieties of Plants (adopted in Paris on 2 December 1961 and revised in 1972, 1978 and 1991).  She held the view that with the adoption of this Law, Kazakhstan had met the 
requirement of Article 27.3(b) of the WTO TRIP S Agreement, namely that WTO Members would 
provide for the protection of plant varieties either by patents, an effective sui generis  system, or a 
combination thereof. 
1070.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that plant variety protection would be 
accorded to natural and juridical persons of all WTO Members from the date of the accession. 
- Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits 1071.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that legal protection of layout designs of integrated 
microcircuits was provided by Law No. 217-III "On Le gal Protection of Layout Design of Integrated 
Microcircuits" of 29 June 2001, and was implemented through Articles 1013-1016 of the Civil Code (Special Part) which, in her view, reflected the provisions of Articles 35-38 of the WTO 
TRIPS Agreement.   
- Requirements on Undisclosed Information,  including Trade Secrets and Test Data 
1072.  A Member enquired how Kazakhstan's legal framework met the requirements of 
Article 39.3 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement, noting that, in this Member's view, to protect 
undisclosed information and test data against unfair commercial use, Governments needed to 
provide an effective period of time during which the person first submitting the data was given a period of exclusive use during which a third party (e.g., a second applicant) could not use or rely 
on such data directly or indirectly to seek mark eting approval/registration, without the permission 
of the person first submitting that data.   
1073.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  Kazakhstan was in the process of drafting 
the law which would introduce a norm providing for the applicant submitting undisclosed 
information and test data to obtain marketing approval/registration for a period of exclusive use that would guarantee that no third party would be pe rmitted to rely directly or indirectly upon the 
applicant's data for a period of time during whic h it would be appropriate under the circumstances 
to prevent unfair commercial use.  She added that, with regard to disclosure of such data, 
pursuant to Article 126 of the Civil Code, the civil legislation ensured the protection of information 
of real (actual) or commercial value, provided that this information was unknown to third parties, 
its confidentiality was strictly preserved, and it was not accessible on legal grounds. 
1074.  She further added that a person accessing restricted information could be liable under 
Article 158 of the Code of Administrative Offenc es.  Moreover, Article 200 of the Criminal Code 
prohibited collection of information that constituted a commercial or banking secret by persons 
who had access to such information in their work capacity, including disclosure or use of such information for financial or other personal interest without the consent of the owner.  Employees of ministries and other State bodies that disclosed protected information were held administratively 
responsible, together with their employers.  Such  disclosure was punishable by imprisonment of up 
to three years, payment of fines, arrest, or correctional labour.  In her view, undisclosed information and test data submitted to obtain ma rketing approval/registration would be protected 
from disclosure under this legislation.   
1075.  Asked to clarify how a person in control of restricted information could enforce his/her 
rights, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the civil legislation provided a number of judicial 
means, including the possibility to file a complaint with the court having jurisdiction over the 
alleged right violation.  The court could order re imbursement of damages and all costs incurred by 
the claimant.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 247 - 
 
  1076.  Asked whether the draft law, which included a provision granting an applicant marketing 
approval for a period of exclusive use of data, su bmitted to obtain that approval, would guarantee 
that no third party would be permitted to rely, directly or indirectly, upon the applicant's data without the applicant's permission and whether the draft law had been adopte d, the representative 
of Kazakhstan replied that this draft Law "On Commercial Secrets" had been withdrawn from the 
Parliament and that no reconsideration was planned.  
1077.  Some Members expressed their concerns that without legal provisions requiring the 
authorities to prohibit the unfair commercial use of undisclosed information and test data provided 
to obtain marketing approval/registration in Kazakhstan of pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemical products, there would be no effective protection against such use granted to the applicant providing such data.  A period of at leas t six years, starting from the date of marketing 
approval in Kazakhstan, should be provided, and during this period no person other than the 
person who submitted such data originally would be  permitted, without the explicit consent of the 
person who submitted the data, to rely directly or indirectly on such data in support of an 
application for marketing approval/registration.  These Members also sought confirmation that 
applicants that sought marketing approval/registration for generic versions of pharmaceuticals (reproduced medicines) were required to submit pre-clinical and clinical test results and other data 
that was required for marketing approval/registr ation of "original" medicines and would not be 
permitted to rely on others' data without permission for the six-year period of protection against unfair commercial use.  These Members requested th at Kazakhstan comply with Article 39.3 of the 
WTO TRIPS Agreement and provide this level of protection.   
1078.  Some Members also expressed concerns ab out the transparency of the process for 
granting marketing approval/registration for pharmaceuticals and requested that Kazakhstan establish procedures so that an entity submitting undisclosed information and test data to obtain 
marketing approval/registration of a pharmaceutical in Kazakhstan would be informed if another 
application was filed seeking marketing approval/registration of a pharmaceutical with a similar active ingredient.  These Members sought assurances that those entities that had a marketing 
approval/registration or pending application for a pharmaceutical with the same or similar active 
ingredient had an opportunity to provide information to Kazakhstan's officials on whether other applicants had permission to use the first applican t's undisclosed information and test data, and to 
bring to the attention of Kazakhstan's offici als issues regarding a subsequent applicant's 
development and submission of its own undisclosed information and test data.  Members also 
requested information on whether Kazakhstan's officials would deny marketing approval/registration for a pharmaceutical if the applicant did not provide its own undisclosed 
information and test data and on the status of pharmaceuticals that were improperly granted 
marketing approval/registration.  In particular, on whether pharmaceuticals that were granted marketing approval/registration based on applications that did not include the applicant's own 
undisclosed information and test data would be removed from the market until such legal 
requirements were satisfied.   
1079.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan  confirmed that such undisclosed information 
and test data was protected against disclosure under the Civil Code, the Criminal Code, and the 
Code of Administrative Offences, and that there was no time limitation on this protection.  
She further confirmed that Kazakhstan's laws did not permit others to rely, directly or indirectly, on undisclosed test data developed or submitted by another to obtain marketing 
approval/registration in Kazakhstan, and that upon its accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would 
adopt measures to provide for the protection of undisclosed information and test data, in compliance with Article 39.3 of the WTO  Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual 
Property Rights, providing that undisclosed information and test data submitted to obtain 
marketing approval/registration in Kazakhstan, i.e., registration of pharmaceutical products, which utilize new chemical entities, would have a period of at least six years of protection against unfair commercial use starting from the date of grant of marketing approval in Kazakhstan.  During this 
period of protection against unfair commercial use, no person or entity (public or private), other 
than the person or entity who submitted such undisclosed information and test data, could without the explicit consent of the person or entity wh o submitted such undisclosed information and test 
data rely, directly or indirectly, on such data in support of an application for marketing 
approval/registration in Kazakhstan.  Notice of subsequent applications for marketing approval/registration would be provided in accord with established procedures.  During the 
six-year period, any subsequent application for marketing approval/registration would not be 
granted, unless the subsequent applicant submitted his own data (or data used with the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 248 - 
 
  authorization of the right holder) meeting the same requirements as the first applicant, and 
products registered without submission of such data would be removed from the market until requirements were met.  Further, she confirmed that Kazakhstan would protect such data against 
any disclosure, except where necessary to protect the public or unless steps were taken to ensure 
that the data were protected against unfair commercial use.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.  
1080.  In response to Member's concerns about ge neric or "reproduced" pharmaceuticals, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that the six-year prohibition of unfair commercial use of 
undisclosed information and test data submitted to obtain marketing approval/registration in Kazakhstan also applied to generic or reproduced pharmaceuticals, including those pharmaceuticals subject to expedited or abbreviated approval procedures. 
1081.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all agricultural chemicals, including 
mineral fertilizers, were subject to registration in Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Law No. 302-III "On Safety of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007, mineral fertilizers had to be registered not as 
agricultural products but chemical products.  Pe sticides and poisons had to be registered in 
accordance with Government Resolution No. 1396 "On Approval of the Rules on Registration and Production Testing and State Registration of Pesticides" of 30 November 2011.  Specifically, under 
Law No. 302-III "On Safety of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007 and Government Resolution 
No. 1396 "On Approval of the Rules on Registration and Production Testing and State Registration of Pesticides" of 30 November 2011, registration requirements for chemical products, pesticides 
and poisons were the same for every applicant and did not permit the reliance on undisclosed data 
developed or submitted by another applicant to obtain product registration.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments. 
- ENFORCEMENT 
- Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies 
1082.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Civil Code, the Criminal Code, Article 33 
of the Patent Law, and Article 42 of the Tradem ark Law ensured that no discrimination existed 
between domestic and foreign parties to disputes concerning possible infringement of intellectual 
property rights.  Foreign and domestic holders of intellectual property rights had the right to settle disputes in court related to: (i) authorship; (ii) the legality of granting protection; (iii) infringements of exclusive rights and other economic rights; (iv) identification of the patent owner; 
(v) granting of a compulsory licence for patents; (vi) conclusion and execution of licence contracts; 
(vii) compensation and damages for infringement of exclusive rights; and, (viii) other disputes arising from intellectual property rights.  She added that right holders had the right to seek 
protection of their rights from local authorities or administration, which did not prevent them from 
filing an application in court.   
1083.  She noted that, pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the 
court could assist the parties to a dispute in obtaining necessary evidence when evidence relevant 
to the substantiation of one party's claims was in the control of the opposing party.  If necessary, the court could provide the requesting party with an official letter of request for providing the evidence by the opposing party.  In addition, paragraph 1 of Article 74, of the Code of Civil 
Procedure, stipulated that a party could request a "securing of evidence" when in doubt about the 
availability of the necessary evidence at a later point in time.   
1084.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation, the court had the authority to recover from 
the infringer damages that had been incurred by the right holder.  In reply to the specific question, 
the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that Articles 9 and 917 of the Civil Code foresaw a 
complete recovery for damages, including actual damage and lost profit.  Damages included 
expenses that were made or should be made by the person whose right was violated, loss or injury 
of his property (actual damage) and profit that this person could receive if his right would not be violated (lost profit).  In this regard, Articles 9 and 917 of the Civil Code clearly established that the calculation of damages would reference the value of the corresponding legitimate good.  
Article 44 of the Trademark Law stipulated that a person illegally using a trademark or an 
appellation of origin (geographical indication) had to discontinue such use and provide compensation for the damages incurred by the right holders also including actual profit and lost WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 249 - 
 
  profit.  Pursuant to Article 49 of the Copyright Law , the court could oblige a copyright infringer to:  
(i) compensate the claimant for damages including lost profit; (ii) compensate the profit received by the infringer; or (iii) pay compensation in  the amount of 20 to 50,000 minimum wages (500 to 
50,000 minimum wages for infringement of software or database copyright).  Moreover, in 
accordance with Article 111 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court could order the infringer to 
compensate the successful party for attorney's fees; however, the sum could not exceed 10% of the amount of the claim.  Asked specifically about the authority of the courts to order recovery of 
profits pursuant to Article 45(2) of the WTO TRIPS Agreement, she referred to paragraph 4 of 
Article 9, of the Civil Code and paragraph 1 of Article 111, of the Code of Civil Procedure.   
1085.  Asked to provide information on Kazakhstan's compliance with the provisions of Article 46 
of the WTO TRIPS Agreement, she said that Articl e 49 of the Copyright Law stipulated that a judge 
could order the seizure and withdrawal of all co pies of suspected pirated works and phonograms, 
as well as all materials and equipment used in thei r production or reproduction.  Pirated copies of 
works or phonograms could be transferred to the ri ght holders upon their request, or be destroyed 
by a decision of the court.  In addition, Article 129 of the Code of Administrative Offences also 
provided for the seizure and forfeiture of pirated copies of works and phonograms.  The disposal of 
counterfeit goods outside the channels of commerce was foreseen in Article 145 of the Code of 
Administrative Offences, which had been in force since 1 January 2008.  Pursuant to paragraph 2 
of Article 44 of the Trademark Law, a person illegally using a trademark or appellation of origin (geographical indication), or using a confusingly similar designation, had to remove the mark or designation from the product, its packaging, blank forms and all other documentation.  If doing so 
was impossible, the goods were destroyed (liquidated) in accordance with the relevant legal 
procedures.  In reply to the specific comment th at the simple removal of the trademark unlawfully 
affixed should not be sufficient, other than in exceptional cases, the representative of Kazakhstan 
noted that Kazakhstan was planning to amend Article 44 of the Trademark Law in order to ensure 
its compliance with Article 46 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement by the date of WTO accession. 
1086.  Some Members enquired whether any training had been provided to judges to enable them 
to consider disputes involving intellectual property rights.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
replied that judges took active part in discussions on intellectual property rights protection (workshops, conferences and roundtables).  For inst ance, in July 2005, the Ministry of Justice, in 
collaboration with the WIPO, the CIPR and the World Customs Organization (WCO), had held a 
workshop on enforcement practices in the sphere  of intellectual property for judges of the 
Supreme Court and oblast courts.  In 2011, the Minist ry of Justice, in collaboration with the USAID 
had held a conference entitled "Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property Rights in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan".  In addition, the Judicial Acad emy under the Academy of State Service of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan, organized skills improvement trainings for Kazakhstan's judges on different issues related to the applicable law of the country. 
- Provisional Measures 
1087.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that judges and Government bodies had the 
authority to grant provisional measures if any delay was likely to cause irreparable harm to the right holder, or if a demonstrable risk of eviden ce being destroyed existed.  She noted that the 
Trademark Law and the Patent Law did not reference provisional remedies, but pointed to 
Chapter 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure which provided for the imposition of such measures.  According to Article 159 of this Code, judges, at  the request of the claimant or at their own 
initiative, had the power to: (i) seize the defendant's property; (ii) prohibit the defendant from 
taking certain actions, such as sale of goods bearing a trademark belonging to the claimant; (iii) prohibit other persons from transferring property or performing certain actions in respect to 
the defendant; (iv) suspend the sale of property in cases where a claim was filed to cancel the 
seizure of property; (v) suspend a contested legal act issued by a State body, organization or an 
official; and, (vi) suspend a penalty imposed by an  executive document, contested by the debtor in 
court.  The court could order any of the above me asures without prior notice to the defendant.  
The court could also apply other provisional measures for the purposes of Article 158 of the Code 
of Civil Procedure, which foresaw the adoption of such measures in cases where, in their absence, 
the court would not be able to issue a ruling or its work would be hindered.   
1088.  In reply to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the 
Code of Civil Procedure provided for the right of the participants in a proceeding to request 
replacement of one type of provisional measure wi th another.  The request was considered by the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 250 - 
 
  court with notification of participants about ti me and place of the proceedings (Article 162).  
Therefore, a defendant affected by a provisional measure adopted inaudita altera parte 
(i.e., without prior hearing of the other side) had the right to request the review of the measure, 
including the right to be heard.  The Code of Ci vil Procedure also provided for the right of the 
participants or the judge of proceedings to request revocation or cessation of effects of the 
provisional measure (Article 163).  Therefore, if pr oceedings leading to a decision on the merits of 
the case were not initiated within a reasonable period, the participants or the judge of proceedings 
could initiate revocation or cessation of such measures.  In addition, the defendant could request 
compensation from the applicant where there was a  d e c i s i o n  o f  n o  i n f r i n g e m e n t  o r  t h r e a t  o f  
infringement (Article 165). 
1089.  In reply to the concern of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in 
the cases where provisional measures had been adopted inaudita altera parte , parties affected had 
to be given notice, without delay after the execution of the measures at the latest. 
- Administrative Procedures and Remedies 
1090.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that , pursuant to Articles 128, 129 and 145 of the 
Code of Administrative Offences, certain actions were  considered as an infringement of intellectual 
property rights and entailed administrative responsibility.  These included: (i) non-criminal, but 
illegal, use of an invention, industrial design, utility model, selectiion achievement, or microcircuit 
layout design prior to its official publication, as well as misappropriation of authorship or coercion into joint authorship; (ii) non-criminal, but illegal, use of copyright or related rights, as well as the purchase, storage, hauling or production of counterfeit copies of artistic works and/or phonograms 
for the purpose of sale, misappropriation or coercion into joint authorship; and, (iii) non-criminal, 
but illegal, use of a trademark, service mark, appellation of origin (geographical indication) or similar designations for goods (services), as  well as illegal use of a firm name.   
1091.  She noted that such infringements were review ed by the courts.  Petitions were permitted 
during proceedings, persons participating in the review were given a hearing, and evidence was examined.  After consideration of the case, the court terminated the proceedings or imposed 
administrative sanctions.   
1092.  For Article 128 violations, fines for natural persons were set at 20-50 Monthly Calculation 
Index (MCI), for officials at 50-100 MCI, and for juridical persons at 150-400 MCI.  For repeated 
violations under this Article, the corresponding fines were set at 50-100 MCI, 100-150 MCI and 
200-700 MCI, respectively.  As for Article 129 violations, fines for natural persons were set at 
10-15 MCI, for officials at 20-30 MCI, and for juridical persons at 100-150 MCI, with  corresponding confiscation of copies of works and phonograms, as well as the equipment used for 
their production.  For repeated violations under th is Article, the corresponding fines were set at 
15-20 MCI, 30-50 MCI, and 150-200 MCI, respectively , with corresponding co nfiscation of copies 
of works and phonograms and the equipment used fo r their production.  Finally, in the case of 
Article 145 violations, fines for natural persons were set at 10-30 MCI, for officials at 30-50 MCI, 
and for juridical persons at 50-100 MCI, with confi scation of the infringing goods.  For repeated 
violations under this Article, the corresponding fines were set at 30-50 MCI, 50-100 MCI and 100-200 MCI, respectively.  Any interested party could challenge the decision of the court to a higher 
court.   
1093.  Asked about the administrative actions available to owners of intellectual property rights 
for the enforcement of their rights, the bodies resp onsible for such actions, as well as about the 
channels available to foreign parties to invoke such actions, she replied that the applicant (foreign 
or domestic) had the right to raise objections to the Board of Appeal of the Ministry of Justice (Articles 22, 23, and 29 of the Patent Law and Articles 12, 23, 31 and 44 of the Trademark Law).  
If the applicant remained dissatisfied with the de cision of the Board of Appeal, the applicant had 
the right to further appeal that decision in court.  She further noted that while infringements of intellectual property rights were considered by the courts, disputes concerning the rights to objects of industrial property, other than those considered in the Code of Administrative Offences, were 
considered within the framework of civil legislation.  
1094.  Asked to provide more information concerning the procedures followed by the 
administrative commissions in reviewing allegations of infringement of intellectual property rights WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 251 - 
 
  and about the remedies that the commissions could impose, she replied that, in accordance with 
the national legislation, no administrative commissions on infringement of intellectual property rights could be established in Kazakhstan.  Under the legislation, all disputes concerning intellectual property rights could be settled only in the courts. 
- Special Border Measures 
1095.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that as of 1 July 2010, border measures in 
Kazakhstan were applied pursuant to Chapter 46 (Articles 328-333) of the Treaty on the Customs 
Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 (hereinafter: CU Customs Code) and Section 53 
of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan (Articles 436-445).  Consistent with the procedures set-out in Chapter 46 and Section 53, Kazakhstan's customs authorities were authorized to take action to prevent the import and export of goods containi ng objects of intellectual property rights.  
Kazakhstan's State Revenue Committee maintained a Registry of goods containing intellectual 
property, which was published periodically.  Goods were included in the Registry free of charge, at the request of right holders.  This guaranteed that  the rights of applicants would be protected by 
the customs authorities for the duration specified in the application, with the maximum period 
being two years from the date of inclusion in th e Registry (with a possible extension, which could 
not exceed the period of validity of the right itse lf).  Although right holders could register their 
intellectual property with the State Revenue Committee, the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that customs officials could exercise ex officio  authority to seize suspect goods even if 
right holders did not have the registration.   
1096.  In order to address the concern of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan gave the 
following examples of use of the ex officio  powers:  
- registered trademark "Shemonaikhinskoe" (m ilk):  quantity – 21,000 kg for the value of 
US$12,005; and 
- registered trademarks "Yaguar", "Diplomaticheskaya" and "Senator" (caps for the spirits):  
quantity – 6,022.52 kg (28,012 items) for the value of US$12,045.04.  
1097.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that on 21 May 2010, the 
EAEU member States had signed the Customs Union Agreement on Unified Customs Registry of 
Goods Containing Objects of Intellectual Proper ty, and the State Revenue Committee maintained 
Kazakhstan's contribution to this Unified Customs Registry.  According to this Agreement in order to be included in the Unified Customs Registry, it was required that the intellectual property right 
be protected in Kazakhstan as well as the other EAEU member States.  In the case of an 
intellectual property right included in the Unified Customs Registry, the minimum 
security/guarantee was €10,000.  This CU Agreement would remain in force until it was 
superseded by the new EAEU Customs Code. 
1098.  In reply to the concern that security/guarantee was considerable and could deter right 
holders from participating in the Unified Customs Registry, the representative of Kazakhstan 
clarified that the most widespread form of meeting this obligation was an insurance guarantee, 
i.e., a contract between an insurance company and an applicant.  In accordance with the contract, insurance company guaranteed payments to compensate for property damage.  The real expenses of the applicant for signing such contract would not be higher than from 4% to 7% of the 
security/guarantee sum.  Insurance guarantee was required for each application, but the 
application could cover unlimited trademarks and ob jects of copyright.  No payment was required 
for submission and examination of the application and implementation by the customs authorities 
of border measures.   
1099.  The CU Customs Code and the Customs Code of Kazakhstan authorized the national 
customs authorities to suspend the customs processing of goods containing intellectual property 
for up to 10 working days if the right holder applie d for such protection and if they found that the 
goods violated the intellectual property rights of the applicant.  The CU Customs Code authorized the enforcement of intellectual property rights with  respect to intellectual property not included in 
the Unified Customs Registry in accordance with the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.   
1100.  Asked whether the Customs Code of Kazakhstan provided for any measures allowing the 
customs authorities to suspend the export or transit of counterfeit goods in Kazakhstan, she said WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 252 - 
 
  that Article 440 of the Customs Code of Kazakhst an allowed the customs authorities to suspend 
the release of goods included in the national Cust oms Registry if they discovered any signs of the 
goods being counterfeit.  Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 436 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, the customs authorities did not take enforcement action for goods in transit.  
The procedure for keeping the national Customs Registry had been approved by Order of the 
Minister of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 356 of 16 June 2010. 
1101.  She further noted that, when such goods were discovered, the customs authorities would 
attempt to identify right holders by consulting  the Unified Customs Registry or Kazakhstan's 
national Customs Registry.  If a right holder had no t registered its intellectual property rights on 
these registers, the customs authorities would atte mpt to identify and contact the right holder by 
consulting the registries of the Ministry of Justice.  After the right holder was identified, the 
customs authorities informed him/her about the goods under investigation and provided the right 
holder, or his/her representative, with the oppo rtunity to inspect samples/specimens from the 
goods under customs supervision at the place of  temporary storage (Article 440 of the Customs 
Code of Kazakhstan and CU Commission Decision No. 258 "On Customs Examination under 
Customs Control" of 20 March 2010).  Pursuant to Article 440 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, the customs authorities had to provide the righ t holder with the name and address of the 
declarant, as well as provide the declarant with  the name and address of the right holder.  
This was done within one day of taking a decision to suspend the release of the goods, i.e., before 
the matter was taken to court and before the infringement was identified by the right holder.  Pursuant to the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, the customs authorities were entitled to receive 
compensation to cover expenses incurred in connect ion with the suspension of the goods (e.g., for 
warehouse storage).  For goods that proved to be counterfeit, such compensation would be provided by the declarant, and for goods that pr oved not to be counterfeit, by the applicant.  
However, so far, such a situation had not occurred.   For goods that proved not to be counterfeit, 
the right holder would compensate the declarant for any damages incurred (minimum security/guarantee of €10,000 was a requirement for right holders wishing to include goods in the 
national Customs Registry).  The exact amount of compensation could be agreed between the 
declarant and the right holder, or could be determined by the court.   
1102.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that intellectual property right holders would 
be provided, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the EAEU, with procedures 
related to border measures that complied fully with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement 
on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (Articles 51 to 60).  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
1103.  Asked whether the customs authorities were the sole enforcer of intellectual property laws 
and what was the role of police units in proactive and reactive infringement investigations, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the court, the office of the public prosecutor, the internal 
affairs authorities and the financial police were among those who were actively involved in the 
enforcement of intellectual property laws in Kazakhstan.  Police units worked in close cooperation with right holders as well as conducted repeated, unannounced inspections in order to examine compliance with intellectual property rights legi slation.  If evidence of unauthorized use of 
intellectual property rights protection was found, administrative or criminal proceedings were 
initiated.   
- Criminal Procedures 
1104.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Criminal Code provided for legal protection 
against infringement of intellectual property rights and for criminal responsibility.  The provisions of the Criminal Code had been strengthened with the adoption of Law No. 90-III "On Amendments 
and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property" of 
22 November 2005.  In particular, these amendments had introduced the concepts of "selection achievements" and "integrated circuit layouts", and had also provided definitions of certain types of infringement, namely, illegal acquisition, storage or hauling of counterfeit copies of works and 
phonograms.   
1105.  Criminal sanctions for infringement of   co pyright and related rights were provided in 
Article 184 of the Criminal Code.  Under paragrap h 1 of Article 184 and paragraph 1 of Article 184-
1, fines equivalent to 100-500 MCI or equivalent to up to five times the monthly income of the 
convicted party, as well as 100 to 180 hours of public work or imprisonment for up to two years WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 253 - 
 
  were authorized for:  (i) usurpation of authorship or coercion into joint authorship, if such action 
caused considerable damages; and (ii) disclosure without the consent of the author/applicant of an invention, utility model, industrial design, selection achievement or microcircuit layout design prior to its official publication.  Under paragraph 2 of  Articles 184 and paragraph 2 of Article 184-1, fines 
equivalent to 500-700 MCI or 180 to 240 hours of public work or imprisonment for a period of up 
to one year were authorized for:  (i) the illegal use of a copyright and related rights, as well as the purchase, storage and production of counterfeit copies of artistic works and/or phonograms for the 
purpose of sale (in significant quantities); and (ii) the illegal use of an invention, utility model, 
industrial design, selection achievement or microcircuit layout design (in significant quantities).  Under paragraph 3 of Article 184 and paragraph 3 of 184-1, imprisonment up to one year and from two to five years, respectively, with or without confiscation of the property of the convicted 
party, was authorized for the actions identified  under paragraph 2 of Article 184 and paragraph 2 
of Article 184-1 where those actions were committed:  (i) on repeated occasions (either by individuals or a group of individuals); (ii) by a group of individuals or an organized group of 
individuals; (iii) on a large-scale or causing large-scale damage; or, (iv) with abuse of official 
position.  She added that criminal cases under paragraph 1 of Article 184 and paragraph 1 of 184-1 (in relation to private non-property rights ) required a complaint by the right holder.  
Criminal cases under paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 184 and paragraphs 2 and 3 of 184-1 (large-
scale acquisition for the purpose of sale, repeated offences by organized groups or abuse of official position) could be opened without a complaint by the right holder because such offences were deemed to be dangerous for the society.   
1106.  Pursuant to Article 199 of the Criminal Code, the minimum threshold for bringing criminal 
cases involving unlawful use of a trademark, service mark, firm name, appellation of origin (geographical indication) or other designations of goods (services) was 500 MCI.  The court could 
impose a fine of 200-500 MCI.  For repeated violations, or those resulting in large-scale damage 
(i.e., exceeding 500 MCI, or approximately US$5,000), the court could impose fines equivalent to 200-500 MCI, or to the amount of income received by the convicted party for a period of two to 
five months; 180 to 240 hours of public work; detention for up to six months; or imprisonment for 
up to two years.  For unlawful use of a trademark or appellation of origin (geographical indication) 
not registered in Kazakhstan, if the action was performed repeatedly and resulted in large-scale damage, the court could impose fines equivalent to 100-200 MCI, or to the amount of income 
received by the convicted party for up to two months; public work for 120 to 180 hours; detention 
for up to three months; or imprisonment for up to one year. 
1107.  Actions were considered to cause considerable damage if the amount of the damage, the 
value of the rights for the use of intellectual prop erty rights, or the value of the copies of the 
works and phonograms containing an invention, utility model, industrial design, selection achievement or microcircuit layout design exceeded 100 MCI, as established at the time of the 
crime.  Actions were considered to cause large-scale damage if that value exceeded 500 MCI. 
1108.  A Member asked what was the status and/or likely outcome for determining thresholds for 
application of criminal procedures and penalties with regard to cases of wilful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale and what was the timeline for 
Kazakhstan's decision.  The representative of Kaza khstan replied that the application of thresholds 
was traditionally used in Kazakhstan in order to separate criminal offences punishable by means of criminal prosecution from administrative misdemeanours.  This clear and unambiguous criterion 
was an effective, practical tool for enforcement, as it could be implemented easily and contained 
no element of subjective evaluation.  The ti meline for determining a threshold (within a 
preliminary investigation) could not exceed a two-month period which, however, could be 
extended in exceptionally difficult cases. 
1109.  Concerning the seizure, forfeiture and destruction of counterfeit goods, as well as 
materials and equipment used in their production, she pointed to paragraph 3 of Article 121 of the 
Code of Criminal Procedure and Resolution of th e Supreme Court No. 19 "On Judicial Sentence" of 
15 August 2002 (see also Sub-section "Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies" of this Section of 
this Report). 
1110.  According to official statistics, in 2009, 493 legal proceedings had been instituted under 
Articles 184 and 199 of the Criminal Code.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 254 - 
 
  1111.  Some Members noted that there was a criminal penalty for pirated copyright and related 
rights (Article 184 of the Criminal Code), but expr essed concern that there did not appear to be a 
criminal penalty for counterfeit trademark goods.  They further stated that the administrative fines 
provided by the Code of Administrative Offences appeared insufficient to serve as an effective 
deterrent. 
1112.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that criminal penalties to prevent trade in 
counterfeit trademark goods were provided in Arti cle 199 of the Criminal Code.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan added that Law No. 90-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative 
Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intelle ctual Property" of 22 November 2005 had reinforced 
the sanctions available against infringement and repeated infringement of copyright and other rights, and provided for sanctions for administrative infringements.  Recognizing Members' 
concerns, the representative of Kazakhstan stated  that in order to improve the effectiveness of 
enforcement measures in the area of intellectual property rights, when determining the existence 
of large-scale or considerable damage, the prosecutor/court would take into account that storage 
of pirated copies of works or phonograms for th e purpose of sale was also considered to be a 
crime.  Thus, application of the thresholds to the activity would take into account both the value of 
the pirated copies of works or phonograms that we re sold, and the value of the pirated copies in 
storage.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's law, the value of pirated copies was calculated by 
reference to the value of the corresponding legiti mate products, and not by reference to the price 
of the pirated product.  This approach of taking into account copies in storage would also apply in 
cases of copyright infringement over the Internet. 
1113.  Some Members continued to have concerns that Kazakhstan's thresholds for application of 
criminal procedures and penalties precluded action against certain cases of wilful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale.  These Members requested Kazakhstan to 
ensure that criminal procedures and penalties would be applied to all cases of wilful trademark 
counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale.  In their view, the value of the products that were counterfeited or pirated was not always a good indicator of whether the counterfeiting 
was wilful or if piracy was on a commercial scale.  Other circumstances could establish wilful 
trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy on a commercial scale.  For example, in some cases, 
each individual act of piracy might involve a small amount of money, but given other conditions in the market, e.g., the number of pirated copies, or the existence of copies made before the release 
of the work, the acts were clearly on a commercial scale.  Finding other evidence, such as a worn 
mold for making copies, would be another situation in which commercial scale piracy was evident. 
1114.  In response to Members' concerns regarding thresholds for application of criminal 
procedures and penalties with regard to cases of wilful trademark counterfeiting or copyright 
piracy on a commercial scale, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that thresholds in such cases would be set and applied in a manner that reflected the realities of the commercial market 
place in Kazakhstan, including with regard to the Internet market.  The Working Party took note of 
this commitment. 
1115.  Members sought a commitment that Kazakhstan would be in compliance with the WTO 
TRIPS Agreement, including its enforcement provisions, as of the date of accession, without 
recourse to transitional arrangements.   
1116.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that Kazakhstan would apply fully the 
provisions of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights from 
the date of its accession to the WTO, including pr ovisions for enforcement, without recourse to any 
transitional period.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
VI. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES 
1117.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the services sector was one of the most 
dynamic sectors of the economy, and its role was ex pected to grow in the future.  Since 1990, the 
share of services in GDP had grown steadily to reach a peak of 60% in 1998, while the average 
level for the last decade had been 50%; in 2010, the share had stood at 52.8%.   
1118.  Some Members requested information on the legislative base regulating commercial 
services and asked whether the Government was taking measures to ensure non-discrimination WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 255 - 
 
  with regard to foreign service suppliers.  The representative of Kazakhstan, noting the growing 
role of services in the national economy, said that the existing legislative framework governing the services sector was still being developed and generally there was no discrimination against foreign service suppliers.   
1119.  In response to a question on "natural monopolies" in the telecommunications sector, she 
said that the Telecommunications Sector Development Programme for the period 2006-2008, adopted by Government Resolution No. 519 of 7 June  2006, had outlined a plan for stage-by-stage 
liberalization of the telecommunications market.  These measures were expected to facilitate 
competition, improve the quality and capacity of  telecommunication services, and remove barriers 
to new entrants.  Accordingly, since 1 January 2005, the exclusive right of JSC "KazakhTeleCom" to provide international and long distance communication services had been discontinued, and 
licenses for the provision of these services were now held by more than 25 operators.  In addition, 
since 1 January 2006, all restrictions on the inter-connectivity between operators had been removed and customers were given the technical opportunity to choose between operators of 
international and long distance communications.  Pursuant to amendments to Article 4 of Law 
No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies of Regulated Market s" of 9 July 1998, the activities of natural 
monopolies no longer pertained to "telecommunication services through local networks", but 
instead covered: (i) telecommunication services, when there was no other competing operator due 
to the fact that it might be economically and technically infeasible to enter the market (specifically, these telecommunication services included operator connection services to universal connection networks and telephone traffic transmission services); and (ii) lease or use of cable channels and 
other basic facilities technologically related to connecting telecommunication networks with 
telecommunications of common use.  She added that pursuant to Law No. 567-II "On Communications" of 5 July 2004: (i) local te lephone communication services; (ii) area and 
long distance telephone services; and, (iii) services providing mass Internet access with 
connection speed no less than 256 Kb/sec., were defined as universal telecommunication services which were subject to governmental regulation.   
1120.  In accordance with Law No. 527-IV "On National Security of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
6 January 2012, foreign participation in the capita l of companies providing long distance and/or 
international telecommunication services using fixed communication networks (cable, optical fibre, and radio relay) was limited to 49%.  This limita tion had been introduced to protect the national 
security interests of Kazakhstan.  However, this limitation did not apply to operators of mobile, 
satellite and local communications and would be removed for all companies other than JSC "KazakhTeleCom" (and its possible successors) within a period of 2.5 years starting from the date 
of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.   
1121.  The representative of Kazakhstan also pointed to a number of other liberalization initiatives 
in this sector.  To avoid cross-subsidization and to recover the financial losses of operators 
rendering universal telecommunication services in rural areas, her Government had begun 
subsidizing these operators through the State bu dget.  From 1997 to 2010, 371 licenses for local 
communication services and 511 licenses for rend ering data transmission services had been 
issued.  To resolve the "last mile" problem of access to customers, 51 operators had received 
permission to use the 5.2-5.9 GHz radio spectrum.   
1122.  Some Members noted that it was clear that there was no "natural" monopoly in the 
telecommunication services sector, adding that the limited nature of Kazakhstan's offer in the 
negotiation of its services commitments supported the contention that a State monopoly was being 
granted and preserved.  A Member noted that, while "KazakhTeleCom" no longer had exclusive 
rights for the provision of international and long distance communication, the company had 
participated in a tender for the acquisition of another telecommunication company, effectively 
creating a State-owned monopoly in the telecommunications sector.   
1123.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that KazakhTeleCom's actions were in 
compliance with Kazakhstan's antitrust legislation.  She noted that KazakhTeleCom's share in 
Kazakhstan's market did not exceed 30% in all types of telecommunication services. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 256 - 
 
  1124.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to explain the local content requirements relating to 
services22, in particular with regard to foreign invested companies and to identify those 
circumstances in which a foreign investor was required to buy services only from Kazakhstan-based companies unless the required service was unavailable in Kazakhstan.   
1125.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the local content requirement with regard to 
surface and subsurface use pertained to all services acquired by subsurface users.  This was a non-discriminatory requirement, which equally applied to both foreign and domestic investors 
signing investment agreements with the Government of Kazakhstan on use of surface and 
subsurface resources.  This provision was included in Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010.  This Law established a requirement for such investors to procure services from juridical persons of Kazakhstan, provided that such services met the 
requirements of the project documentation and Kaza khstan's legislation on technical regulation.  
If services required were not found in Kazakhstan , a subsurface user could attract foreign country-
based companies to provide those services.  Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" 
of 24 June 2010 did not stipulate a minimum perc entage of local content requirements, but 
provided that a contract had to contain obligations in respect to Kazakhstan's goods, services, and personnel, which were determined individually in each contract on subsurface use and were 
dependent on the complexity and specificity of th e project.  The winner of the competitive bidding 
to provide services to the investor was determined on the basis of the lowest price, with putative 
discounts granted for service suppliers meeting certain minimum thresholds for employment of citizens of Kazakhstan.   
1126.  Asked to clarify whether an investor only had to use the tender process or if it might find 
service providers through other methods, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan responded that, in 
addition to tenders, subsurface users could also use other procurement methods such as a 
quotation request, from one source and through commodity exchanges.  Tendering was the most 
commonly used procurement method since it was more transparent and gave equal opportunities to all suppliers to participate in the bid.  
1127.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would not adopt any 
measure pertaining to requirements to use Kazakh stan content that exceeded those provided for 
in Law No. 291-IV  "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010 as was in effect in September 2011.  Upon accession, in establishing the terms for conducting a tender for granting 
subsurface use rights, Kazakhstan would not establish a minimum Kazakhstan content for 
personnel or services of more than 50%, as determined pursuant to this paragraph:  (a) Kazakhstan content of personnel of an invest or that had been granted subsurface use rights 
("the investor") would be calculated as the prop ortion, on a per capita basis, of executives, 
managers and specialists, as those terms were defined for purposes of entry and temporary stay of intra-corporate transferees in Kazakhstan's WTO Schedule of Specific Commitments on Trade in 
Services ("qualified employees"), who were citizens  of Kazakhstan; (b) Kazakhstan content in all 
services, which were rendered to the investor, was defined as the share of the total annual amount of payments (expenditures) for services under all contracts, which were paid to juridical persons of Kazakhstan
23.  However, the amount paid to juridical persons of Kazakhstan would be reduced by 
any amount paid for services subcontracted at an y level that were performed by enterprises that 
were not juridical persons of Kazakhstan; and, (c) in determining the tender winner for purposes of granting subsurface use rights, Kazakhstan would not take into account the fact that a potential 
investor might have offered a level of Kazakhstan content for personnel or services above 50%.  
Within five years from the date of its accessi on to the WTO, Kazakhstan would bring into 
conformity with above-mentioned terms any cont ract signed between September 2011 and the 
date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.   
1128.  Some Members requested information on the regulation of the banking sector, and in 
particular, requested information on the conditions under which a foreign bank would be able to obtain a licence to establish a branch within Kazakhstan.  In response, the representative of 
                                               
22 The term services included both "services" and "works" as those terms were used in Law No. 291-IV 
"On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010. 
23 A contract with a juridical person of Kazakhstan woul d be disregarded, if that person did not actually 
carry out the agreed activity in Kazakhstan.  The term "j uridical person of Kazakhstan" included also individual 
entrepreneurs. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 257 - 
 
  Kazakhstan stated that direct branching would be permitted under a new banking law or 
amendment to the current banking law upon expirati on of the five-year period starting from the 
date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.  She reported that the activities of banking firms were regulated by Law No. 2444 "On Banks and Banking Ac tivity in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
31 August 1995.  Under the Law, a juridical person was required to have a licence to engage in a 
banking business.  Article 15 of Law No. 2444 provided that banks had to be established in the form of a joint stock company.  The licensing criteria to be adopted for branches of foreign banks 
would be prudential in nature.  She clarified that Kazakhstan's commitments in the banking and 
other financial services (excluding insurance) sector s with respect to branches were related only to 
foreign bank branches.  Also, the authorized body of Kazakhstan was permitted to impose 
additional requirements providing for the solvency and stability of financial organizations.  
However, there may be differences between the licensing criteria for a joint stock bank and those 
for a branch of a foreign bank.  The representative  of Kazakhstan added that the National Bank of 
Kazakhstan would comply with the requirements of Articles XVI and XV II of the GATS when 
considering an application for a new licence, subject to the limitations set forth in Kazakhstan's 
Schedule of Specific Commitments on Trade in Services.  
1129.  In response to questions from a Member related to the regulatory regime for foreign bank 
branches, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the regime was yet to be developed but it 
would be in line with commonly accepted international practice.  This regime would include, but would not be limited to such requirements, as fo r example, capital adequacy, which would depend 
on the parent bank's capital.  The specific capital requirement for a foreign bank branch would 
differ depending on its business plans in Kazakhst an; a branch would be required to maintain a 
deposit with the National Bank of Kazakhstan, the sum of which would be based on obligations which would be accepted by the foreign bank branch .  In addition, a branch would be required to 
have at least two resident managers. 
1130.  Some Members stated that they expected Kazakhstan to make a commitment to 
guarantee transparency of licensing requirements and procedures, qualification requirements and 
procedures as well as of other authorization requirements, in particular with respect to obtaining, 
extending, renewing, denying and terminating lice nses and other approvals required to provide 
services in Kazakhstan's market and appeals of such actions.  Kazakhstan's licensing procedures and conditions should not in themselves act as a barrier to market access and should not be more 
trade restrictive than necessary.  Kazakhstan should publish a list of authorities responsible for 
authorizing, approving or regulating those service sectors in which Kazakhstan had made specific commitments and Kazakhstan's licensing procedur es and conditions.  Members also expected 
Kazakhstan to make a commitment to guarantee that for those services included in Kazakhstan's 
WTO Schedule of Specific Commitments on Trade in Services, relevant regulatory authorities would be separated from, and not accountable to, any service suppliers they regulated.  Members 
further expected Kazakhstan to make a commitment to guarantee that foreign service suppliers 
remained free to choose their partners. 
1131.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, upon accession Kazakhstan 
would ensure that all normative legal acts of general application pertaining to or affecting trade in 
services, as well as information on their effective date and scope of application were published
24 or 
made otherwise publicly available.  She further confirmed that Kazakhstan would ensure that the 
names of competent authorities that were responsible for certification and issuing licenses for 
service activities were published or made otherw ise publicly available.  The Working Party took 
note of these commitments. 
1132.  Without prejudice to the right of Kazakhstan to establish and apply licensing procedures 
and requirements, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed, that in sectors in which 
Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments, Kazakhstan would ensure that its licensing procedures would not in themselves constitute a restriction on the supply of the service, and its 
licensing requirements directly related to eligibility to supply a service would not in themselves be 
an unjustified barrier to the supply of the service.   She further confirmed that for those services 
sectors in which specific commitments were undertaken by Kazakhstan in its WTO Schedule of Specific Commitments on Trade in Services, Kazakhstan would ensure that:  
                                               
24 Publication would include publication on the Internet.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 258 - 
 
  (a) All licensing procedures and requirements were set out in normative legal acts and that 
any law establishing or implementing licensing procedures or requirements would be published prior to its effective date;  
(b) Relevant authorities would review and make a decision on granting or denying a licence 
within the period specified in official procedures or, if no time period was specified, without 
undue delay;  
(c) Any fees charged in connection with the filing and review of an application for a licence 
would not constitute in themselves a restriction on the supply of the service; 
(d) Once any period established in a normative legal act for review of an application for a 
licence had lapsed, and on the request of an applicant, Kazakhstan's relevant regulatory authority would inform the applicant of the status of its application and whether it was 
considered complete.  If the authority required additional information from the applicant, it 
would notify the applicant without delay and specify the additional information required to complete the application.  Applicants would ha ve the opportunity to provide the additional 
information requested and to make technical corrections in the application.  An application 
would not be considered complete until all information and documents specified in the relevant laws and regulations were received;  
(e) Kazakhstan's relevant regulatory authority would make an administrative decision on a 
completed application for issuance of a licence and authorization for the supply of a financial service, and, if appropriate, approval  of new products and rate changes, within a 
reasonable period of time and would promptly notify the applicant of the decision.  
An application would not be considered complete until all information specified in the 
relevant normative legal acts was received.  Where it was not practicable for a decision to be made on:   
(i) an application for supply of banking services to receive an authorization within 
six months, and to receive a licence within two months; and, 
(ii) an application for supply of other financial services to receive an authorization 
within three months, and to receive a licence within one month, 
 the relevant regulatory authority would notify the applicant without delay; (f) On the written request of an unsuccessful applicant, a regulatory authority that had denied 
an application would inform the applicant in writing of the reasons for denial of the 
application.  However, this provision would not be construed to require a regulatory 
authority to disclose information, the disclosure of which would impede law enforcement or otherwise be contrary to the national security interests; 
(g) Where an application had been denied, an applicant may submit a new application that 
attempted to address any prior problems for licensing; 
(h) Where approval was required, once the application had been approved, the applicant 
would be informed in writing and in the time period provided for by the relevant normative 
legal act or, if no time period was specified, without undue delay; and, 
(i) Where examination was required to licence professionals, such examinations would be 
scheduled at reasonable intervals.  That would not apply to qualifying examinations 
administered or offered by financial service regulators or self-regulatory bodies or 
organizations. 
The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
1133.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that in those sectors, where 
Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments, relevant regulatory authorities would not be accountable to any service suppliers they regulate d.  Further, the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that in sectors in which Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments it would 
ensure where practicable, that: 
(a) regulations of general application that it proposed to adopt were published in advance; 
(b) an opportunity to comment on such propos ed regulations was provided to interested 
persons and other Members; and, 
(c) a reasonable time between publication of the final regulation and its effective date was 
allowed.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 259 - 
 
  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
1134.  With respect to foreign service suppliers' choice of partner, the representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that in those sectors, where Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments, foreign service suppliers, when entering into joint venture or other partnerships 
with persons of Kazakhstan, were free to choose their partner(s).  This was without prejudice to 
regulations relating to ownership of financial organizations or participation in them.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
1135.  In response to the question of a Member whether existing legislation of Kazakhstan 
provided for possibility to review administrative decisions, such as the denial of a licence, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Article 46 of Law No. 214-III "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007, if a licence was not issued within the time-frame established 
by the Law or the applicant contested the denial to issue a licence as unreasonable, the applicant 
had the right to appeal to the court in accord ance with the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (Code of Civil Procedure No. 411-I of  13 July 1999 ).  Terms and procedures for the 
review of decisions such as the denial of a licence were established in the Code of Civil Procedure.  
Specifically, in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a natural or a juridical person had the right to file an application to the court within three months of the date when they 
became aware of the violation of their rights, freedoms and interests guaranteed by the law.  
The application was reviewed by the court within one month.  If the court found that the applicant's rights, freedoms and interests were vi olated, the court obliged an appropriate state 
authority to eliminate the violation.  The relevant state authority had to notify the court and the 
applicant of the enforcement of the court's decision  no later than one month of the date the state 
authority had received the court's decision. 
1136.  A Member asked to clarify the scope of EAEU competence in trade in services and 
investments between the EAEU member States, and between the EAEU member States and third 
countries.  The representative of Kazakhstan replie d that trade in services and investments within 
the Single Economic Space (SES) had been regula ted by the Agreement on Trade in Services and 
Investments of 9 December 2010, enacted as of 1 January 2012.  The SES Agreement was 
terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effe ct on 1 January 2015.  The provisions of the SES 
Agreement were incorporated into Section XV "Trade in Services, Establishment, Activities and Investments" and Annex No. 16 "Protocol on Trade in Services, Establishment, Activities, and 
Investments" of the EAEU Treaty.  Section XV and Annex No. 16 regulated internal trade in 
services, establishment, activities and investments between the EAEU member States. The basic objective of the Section was to create conditions for free movement of services and investments 
within the EAEU.  In order to create such conditions, the EAEU member States aspired to create a 
Single Services Market in the services sectors, which were approved by the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council based on the proposals of the EAEU Member States.  At the same time, each 
EAEU member State was entitled to reserve the right to maintain the exemptions from national 
treatment regime and reservations on market access in accordance with its individual lists of exemptions, based on its national interests.  Section XV and Annex No. 16 of the EAEU Treaty did not apply to trade in services establishment, activities and investments between the 
EAEU member States and third countries.  External policy in trade in services was in the national 
competences of each EAEU member State.  
1137.  The Republic of Kazakhstan had undertaken market access negotiations in services with 
Members of the Working Party.  The commitments of  the Republic of Kazakhstan in services were 
contained in the WTO Schedule of Specific Commitments on Trade in Services, reproduced in Annex I to the Protocol of Accession. 
VII. TRANSPARENCY 
- Publication of Information on Trade 1138.  Some Members requested a description of the measures providing legal authorization for 
Kazakhstan to implement Article X of the GATT 1994 and the other transparency provisions in the 
WTO Agreements, together with a confirmation that these measures would be applied upon 
accession.  A clarification was particularly sought on where the laws, decrees, resolutions, orders, letters and other measures of general application of Kazakhstan would be published to fulfil the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 260 - 
 
  requirements of Article X of the GATT 1994, and the transparency provisions in other 
WTO Agreements, including the WTO GATS and TRIPS Agreements.  Because the EAEU member States and competent bodies of the EAEU were adopting international treaties, decisions and other measures related to trade, Members also requested confirmation that the 
EAEU member States and competent bodies of the EAEU would comply with the transparency 
provisions of the WTO Agreement on matters within EAEU competency.   
1139.  Some Members stated that access to customs regulations and decrees was vital for traders 
attempting to import and export.  In this regard, Members also noted that, since 1 July 2010, 
when the Customs Union had entered into force, an d now that the EAEU had entered into force on 
1 January 2015, agreements, decisions and other legal instruments affecting trade with the EAEU as a whole, and with Kazakhstan as an EAEU me mber State, had become relevant to Members and 
traders.  These Members requested information on when and where these agreements, decisions 
and other legal instruments would be published and made available to Members and traders. 
1140.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan of 15 August 1995 stipulated that all laws and international treaties signed by 
Kazakhstan had to be published.   
1141.  Law No. 213-I "On Regulatory Legal Acts" of 24 March 1998 provided for the official 
publication and subsequent official publication of regulatory legal acts.  Regulatory legal acts, 
including those affecting the rights, freedoms and obligations of citizens (other than acts containing State secrets and legally-protected confidential information), were published in the official periodicals.  In particular, laws were published in the Bulletin of Parliament; Presidential 
and Government Resolutions were published in the Collection of Acts of the President and the 
Government; and legal acts of the Central Executive and other Central State Bodies were published in the Collection of Acts of the Central Executive and Other Central State Bodies.  
Regulatory legal acts were also officially published in the periodicals "Yegemen Kazakhstan" and 
"Kazakhstanskaya Pravda".  Regulatory Decision s and Resolutions of Maslikhats and Akims were 
published in local periodicals and were distributed within the respective administrative territorial 
entity.  Subsequent publication took place in periodicals after the texts had undergone a 
compliance check with the centralized collection of legal acts of Kazakhstan.  The list of regulatory legal acts was published and regularly updated on the website of the Ministry of Justice: www.minjust.kz. 
1142.  In accordance with Law No. 213-I "On Regulatory Legal Acts" of 24 March 1998, after the 
elaboration of a regulatory legal act, the draft had to be sent to the concerned State bodies and organizations for approval.  The draft regulatory legal act affecting the interests of private entities 
was subject to mandatory publication (circulation) in the mass media, including Internet resources, 
prior to sending it for the approval of the concer ned State bodies.  Regulatory legal acts affecting 
private entity interests had to be approved by accredited business associations.  The State body, 
which had elaborated the draft regulatory legal ac t, would send it to the accredited business 
associations.  Accredited business associations considered the draft and submitted their opinion 
within 10 working days.  In case the formulation of the opinion would require additional time, the term could be extended, upon written request, for another 10 working days.  If the State body, 
which had developed the draft regulatory legal act, agreed with the opinion, it introduced the 
relevant amendments into the draft regulatory lega l act.  In cases where the State body disagreed 
with the expert reports, it would send a reply,  outlining its reasons, to the association(s).  
If needed, the association(s) could request a meet ing of the expert council.  Further, the draft 
regulatory legal act, including the opinion or justification of disagreement, would be sent to the State bodies concerned, for approval.  After approv al of the draft regulatory legal act, the State 
body, which had elaborated the draft regulatory legal act, would publish it on its official website, 
including the proposals of the expert council an d interested individuals, the replies of the 
Government bodies, as well as the protocols and expert reports on each effective regulatory legal act that had been tabled for discussion at the experts' council meeting.  The terms of entry into 
force of regulatory legal acts that would affect private enterprise entities' interests were fixed with 
the acceptance of the terms required for entrepre neurs to be in a position to carry out their 
activities.  The terms and conditions for the entry into force of regulatory legal acts must not cause 
damage to private enterprise entities.  Regulatory  legal acts that set qualification requirements, 
licensing of activities, and lists of goods that we re subject to export and import licensing did not 
become effective until 21 days after the re levant acts' official publication.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 261 - 
 
  1143.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  international agreements within the EAEU, 
the EAEU international agreements with third countries and decisions of the EAEU bodies would be published in the official website of the Commissi on (www.eurasiancomission.o rg).  Decisions were 
posted on this website within two working days after their adoption.  She noted that the 
Commission had a dedicated website and the date of publication of a measure on the website was 
considered to be the official date for determining the date of entry into force of the measure.  As a general rule, decisions of the Commission of a mandatory nature did not enter into force earlier 
than 30 calendar days after the date of their publication on the Commission website.  Decisions of 
the Commission taken in exceptional cases that required immediate reaction could have another date of entry into force, but no less than 10 calend ars days after official publication.  Decisions of 
the Commission that improved the conditions of natural and juridical persons could be applied 
retroactively and could also have another date of entry into force, but no less than 10 calendars 
days after official publication.  She also stated that the EAEU member States were required to publish all decisions of the Commission in dedicated national official journals, stating the date of 
entry into force of a decision, the basis for which was the date of publication on 
the Commission website. 
1144.  Some Members expressed concern that the EA EU Treaty and Commission decisions did not 
appear to provide the opportunity for Members to consult with or provide comments to the 
competent EAEU bodies on matters affecting trade, including where provisions of the WTO Agreements specifically required Members to provide drafts of measures, receive comments from Members, consult on those comments, and take the comments and discussions into account.  
These Members requested a commitment that Kazakhstan would make drafts of laws and other 
normative legal acts, as well as proposals/submissi ons to the EAEU bodies that, if adopted, would 
have the effect of a normative legal act in Kazakhstan, available for interested persons, including 
Members, to provide comments prior to their adoption and that Kazakhstan and the competent 
bodies of the EAEU would comply with the transp arency requirements of the WTO Agreements on 
matters within their respective competence. 
1145.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Part II of Annex No. 7 
"Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third Countries" to the EAEU Treaty, organizations or individual entrepreneurs of the EAEU member States could provide comments, as provided for under the procedure of the development of draft decision on introduction, implementation and 
termination of non-tariff measure, concerning trade in goods with third countries.  Paragraph 6 of 
Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty stated that foreig n activity participants of an EAEU member State 
could provide comments, as provided for under the procedure of the development of draft decision 
of the Commission on introduction, implementation and termination of non-tariff measure, 
concerning trade in goods with third countries.  The procedure for making proposals on introduction or termination of a measure was defined by the Commission.   In addition, in cases 
where an EAEU member State had concluded an international treaty with a third country that 
provided for consultations, the Government of that country, organizations and entrepreneurs of that country could present their views with regard to the measure in compliance with the terms of the relevant treaty.   
1146.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession, all laws, 
regulations, decrees, decisions and administrative rulings of general application pertaining to or 
affecting trade in goods, services, or intellectual property rights, whether adopted or issued in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan or by a competent body of the EAEU, would be published promptly in a 
manner that fulfilled applicable requirements of the WTO Agreement, including those of Article X of the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, the WTO General Agreement on Trade in 
Services, and the WTO Agreement on Trade-Relate d Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.  
The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the competent bodies of the EAEU would update published resources, including websites, containing such measures, on a regular basis and make them readily available to WTO 
Members, individuals and enterprises.  Such measures would be available while they were in effect 
and for a reasonable period after they were no lo nger in effect.  She added that the Republic of 
Kazakhstan intended to post the contents of editions of Bulletin of Parliament, the Collection of 
Acts of the President and the Government, and in the Collection of Acts of the Central Executive 
and Other Central State Bodies.  Official publication of regulatory legal acts was carried out also by 
periodicals as "Yegemen Kazakhstan", "Kazakhstanskaya Pravda", on websites as well, and would 
keep them current.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 262 - 
 
  1147.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that, except in cases of emergency, 
measures involving national security, specific measures setting monetary policy, measures the publication of which would impede law enforcement, or otherwise be contrary to the public interest, or prejudice the legitimate commercial interest of particular enterprises, public or private, 
the Republic of Kazakhstan would publish all laws, regulations, decrees, decisions and 
administrative rulings of general application pertaining to or affecting trade in goods, services, or intellectual property rights, prior to their adoption and would provide a reasonable period of time, 
normally not less than 30 calendar days, for Members and interested persons to comment to the 
responsible authorities before the relevant measure was finalized or submitted to the competent EAEU bodies.  In cases where an EAEU body was responsible for proposing or adopting EAEU legal acts, including decisions, or other measures corresponding to those specified in the preceding 
sentence of this paragraph, the competent EAEU body would publish them before their adoption 
and a reasonable period would be provided for Members and interested persons to comment to the competent EAEU body.  Any comments received during the period for commenting, whether 
provided to the Republic of Kazakhstan or a competent body of the EAEU, would be taken into 
account.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
1148.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, no law, 
regulation, decree, decision or administrative ruling of general application pertaining to or affecting 
trade in goods, services, or intellectual property rights, whether adopted or issued in the Republic 
of Kazakhstan or by a competent body of the EAEU, would become effective prior to publication, as provided for in the applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the WTO General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade  1994, the WTO Ge neral Agreement on Trade in Services, and the 
WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- Notifications 
1149.  Some Members noted that all Members of the WT O were obliged to provide notifications to 
the various subsidiary bodies of the WTO, pu rsuant to the covered WTO Agreements.  These 
Members requested a specific commitment that Kazakhstan would provide, as from the date of 
accession, initial notifications for all WTO Agreements, and that Kazakhstan would also comply with the notification requirements of the WTO Agreements with regard to the EAEU Treaty, the EAEU international agreements and Commission decisions, as well as domestic regulations, 
decrees, decisions or administrative rulings of  general application, subsequently adopted by 
Kazakhstan, which implemented any of the WTO Agreements. 
1150.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, upon the date of accession, the Republic 
of Kazakhstan would submit all initial notifications required by any Agreement constituting part of 
the WTO Agreement, except for the notifications set out in Table 4, which would be submitted 
within the time-frame indicated in that Table.  After submitting its initial notifications, the Republic 
of Kazakhstan would submit subsequent notifications in conformity with the relevant provisions 
and procedures of the WTO Agreement.  The Wo rking Party took note of these commitments. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 263 - 
 
  Table 4: - Timeline for the Su bmission of Notifications  
Notification Requirement Type of Measure Deadline 
WTO  Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994 - Decision on checklist of issues Responses to the checklist of issues 90 days after 
accession 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (ASCM) - Article 25.1 annual;  - GATT 1994, Article XVI:1 
annual Any subsidy as defined in ASCM Article 1.1 which is 
specific within the meaning of ASCM Article 2 as well as any other subsidy which causes increased exports or decreased imports within the meaning of the GATT 1994, Article XVI:1 (Format:  G/SC) 120 days after 
accession 
WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures - Article 5.1 Trade-related investment measures (TRIMs) which 
are inconsistent with the pr ovisions of Article III or 
Article XI of the GATT 1994 and not justified under exceptions to the GATT 1994 (Format:  G/TRI) 90 days after 
accession 
WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures - Article 7.3 Replies to the annual questionnaire on import 
licensing procedures 90 days after 
accession 
WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin - Article 5.1; - Annex II, paragraph 4 Existing non-preferential rules of origin,  judicial 
decisions and administrative rulings of general application relating to non-preferential rules of origin 90 days after 
accession 
VIII. TRADE AGREEMENTS 
1151.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan had free trade agreements (FTAs) 
with other CIS countries, Georgia and Serbia, and along with the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation, had created the Customs Union and then the Eurasian Economic Union.  At the 
moment, these agreements included:  bilateral Free Trade Agreements with CIS countries; a 
bilateral Free Trade Agreement with Georgia; a bilateral Free Trade Agreement with the Republic of Serbia; the Agreement on the Creation of  Free Trade Area between CIS countries of 
15 April 1994 (hereinafter: CIS Free Trade Agreem ent 1994); the Agreement on Free Trade Area 
of 18 October 2011, signed by eight CIS countries
25 (hereinafter: CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011) 
which had replaced the CIS Free Trade Agreemen t 1994); between countries that had signed the 
CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011; the Agreement on  the Customs Union between the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 20 January 1995.  
Implementation of the Treaty on the Estab lishment of Common Customs Territory and the 
Formation of the Customs Union of 6 October 2007 (hereinafter: Treaty on the CU) had been 
initiated on 1 January 2010 among the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Russian Federation with the establishment of the Common External Tariff (CET), the adoption of 
the Customs Union (CU) Customs Code and the estab lishment of the CU institutions.  The Treaty of 
the Eurasian Economic Union (hereinafter: EAEU Treaty), signed in Astana by the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russi an Federation on 29 May 2014, came into effect 
on 1 January 2015.  The list of Kazakhstan's trade agreements is contained in Annex 24 of this Report. 
1152.  With regard to the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
and the Russian Federation, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the first steps towards establishing this Customs Union had been taken with the approval of the Agreement on the 
Customs Union between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus of 6 January 1995 and 
the Agreement on the Customs Union of the Republic  of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Russian Federation of 20 January 1995.  In addi tion, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic 
of Belarus, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federa tion, and the Republic of Tajikistan had signed 
the Agreement on the Establishment of the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space on 
26 February 1999 that was terminated as of 1 January 2015, according to Decision of the 
Interstate Council of the Eurasian Economic Co mmunity (EurAsEC) No. 652 "On Termination of the 
Functioning of the Eurasian Economic Community " of 10 October 2014 (hereinafter: Decision of 
Interstate Council of EurAsEC No.652).  The Agreement had foreseen the gradual creation of a 
                                               
25 The Agreement was signed by the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Moldov a, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan 
and Ukraine. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 264 - 
 
  free-trade area and a customs union that would even tually cover not only trade in goods, but also 
services (national treatment with respect to access to services markets, including the gradual elimination of existing restrictions on natural and juridical persons) and the movement of capital.  In particular, the Agreement had set the initial objective of the elimination of all customs tariffs 
and other restrictions related to trade in goods between the Parties, except those allowed under 
the WTO Agreement, and the establishment of a common external tariff.  
1153.  In order to continue progress towards the establishment of the Customs Union and the 
Single Economic Space, the Agreement on the Es tablishment of the Eurasian Economic Community 
(EurAsEC) had been signed on 10 October 2000 and had entered into force on 30 May 2001.  
On 19 September 2003, the Presidents of the Repub lic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the 
Russian Federation and Ukraine had signed the Agreement on the Establishment of the Single 
Economic Space.  The Parties to the Agreement intended to promote mutual trade and investment 
on the basis of fundamental principles and norms of international law, including WTO rules, and also to increase the competitiveness of their economies via, inter alia , the creation of a free trade 
area and, possibly, a customs union.  According to the Agreement, the Single Economic Space 
would be created on a stage-by-stage basis, taking account the possibility of different implementation speeds and levels of integration am ong the Parties.  Transition from one stage to 
another could be achieved by those Parties who had performed all the measures envisaged in the 
previous stage.  Each Party would determine independently which integration measures it would adopt, as well as the rate and degree of such integration.  However, no specific follow-on agreements aimed at realization of this four-party Single Economic Space had been concluded so 
far, and efforts to implement the Agreement had been suspended. 
1154.  To implement the tasks stipulated in the List  of Activities on Creating the Eurasian 
Economic Community for 2003-2006, the Heads of  Governments of the EurAsEC had authorized 
implementation of previously adopted decisions, conclusion of new international treaties and 
agreements, and the preparation of new documents.  On 6 October 2007, the Republic of Belarus, 
the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Fede ration had concluded the Treaty on the CU.  
According to the Treaty on the CU, the common cu stoms territory had been established in several 
steps and had been completed by 1 July 2011 when  the customs border between the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation had been  eliminated.  Provisions of the agreements 
concluded earlier by the Republic of Belarus,  the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation, and resolutions of governing bodies th at had not conflicted with the Treaty on the 
Establishment of the EurAsEC of 10 December 2 000 (hereinafter: Treaty on the EurAsEC) had 
continued to be in force.  She further noted that the Treaty on EurAsEC was terminated as of 
1 January 2015, according to Decision of Interstate Council of EurAsEC No.652.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that th e Treaty on the CU, agreements, and other acts 
subsequently agreed by the Republic of Kazakh stan, the Republic of Belarus and the Russian 
Federation through the end of 2009, had finalized the legal basis for the Customs Union within the 
EurAsEC and had laid out a framework for progressively increasing economic cooperation between entities of member States, starting with plans fo r the unification of foreign trade, customs policies 
and trade remedies; and initiating cooperation between the financial and banking systems; 
cooperation in social and humanitarian areas; and cooperation in the field of legal regulation.  
The two members of the EurAsEC not parties to the Treaty on the CU (the Republic of Tajikistan 
and the Kyrgyz Republic) had not been members of  the Customs Union established by the Republic 
of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and th e Russian Federation.  She added that progress 
towards a single economic space had continued and had been finalized by the establishment of the EAEU as of 1 January 2015. 
1155.  A Member noted that approximately 62% of the applied import tariffs of the EurAsEC 
members had been harmonized and asked when the rest of the tariff lines would be harmonized.  This Member also inquired if there was a formal schedule for harmonization of the remaining tariff lines.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that currently, tariff harmonization was taking 
place exclusively within the framework of the EAEU .  Almost 100% of import tariffs in the CET had 
been gradually harmonized.  The exemptions granted to Kazakhstan had been limited to 72 tariff lines at 10-digit level out of 11,119 tariff lines at  the applied CET.  By 1 January 2015, the import 
tariffs for those goods were planned to increase up to the levels set by the CET.  The exemptions 
from the CET had been granted in the form of  0% for medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, 
polyethylene, greenhouses, aluminium foil and railway wagons (the list of tariff lines subject to 
exemptions from the CET, with respective transitional periods, is provided in Annex 11 of this WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 265 - 
 
  Report).  As for export tariffs, currently the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, and 
the Republic of Belarus applied separate export duty regimes vis-à-vis  third countries.  
1156.  On 27 November 2009, the EurAsEC Interstate Council had also approved the Treaty on 
the Customs Union Customs Code that had entered into force in the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Russian Federation on 1 July 2010, and in the Republic of Belarus on 6 July 2010.  
 Agreements, decisions and national complementary customs regulations related to the CU Customs Code had been developed.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, as laid 
out in the Treaty on the Establishment of the Common Customs Territory and the Formation of the 
Customs Union of 6 October 2007, the Interstate Council had taken a decision on the establishment of the common customs territory and the completion of the formation of the Customs Union after the tasks set out in the Trea ty had been completed.  The Customs Union had 
been implemented in 2010.  On 1 January 2015, the Customs Union was superseded by the 
Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that a detailed description of the EAEU trade policies and regulations was provided for in the relevant sections of 
this Report. 
1157.  The institutional and legislative set-up of the EAEU was described in Chapter III 
"Framework for Making and Enforcing Policies" of this Report to the extent it was relevant for the trade regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan an d the implementation of its WTO commitments.  
1158.  A Member asked for information on the establishment of the Single Economic Space of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Belarus an d the Russian Federation.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that, on 1 January 2012, 17 ag reements establishing the legal basis for the 
Single Economic Space of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstanand the Russian 
Federation (SES) had entered into force.  She stated that the SES agreements had provided the 
legal framework for the harmonization of legislation of the SES members in the spheres of government support to industrial and agricultural sectors, public procurement, access to services 
rendered by natural monopolies, provision of fair competition, trade in services, movement of 
natural persons, investments, etc. 
1159.  She added that the SES agreements had been aimed at creating conditions for conducting 
a coordinated trade and economic policy between the SES members, with the overall objective to 
provide a level playing field for competition among businesses of the SES members.  She noted 
that the SES agreements had been incorporated in to the EAEU Treaty, which entered into force on 
1 January 2015.  
1160.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  the EAEU was open to the accession of new 
partners, as provided for in Article 108 of the EAEU Treaty.  Membership was open to any State 
that was ready to undertake the obligations and fulfil the commitments called for in the EAEU 
Treaty and other EAEU legal instruments. 
1161.  Concerning the CIS free trade area, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that on 
15 April 1994, the CIS countries had signed the CI S Free Trade Agreement 1994.  This Agreement 
had provided for gradual elimination of customs du ties, taxes and charges and other barriers that 
had impeded the free movement of goods.  The Agreement had not been fully implemented and had been further modified by the Protocol on Amen ding the Agreement on the Creation of the Free 
Trade Area of 2 April 1999.  The Protocol had established that the Free Trade Area would be 
implemented via existing or future bilatera l agreements and protocols on exemptions. 
1162.  The Republic of Kazakhstan had concluded b ilateral Free Trade Agreements with Georgia 
and all CIS countries (the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Belarus, 
the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan, 
the Republic of Uzbekistan and Ukraine), with th e exception of Turkmenistan.  These Agreements 
had established a regime of free trade between the Parties that had covered a substantial part of 
trade in goods between them.  Under these bila teral Free Trade Agreements, mutual trade in 
goods originating from these countries and impo rted to, or exported from, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was free from customs duties, except for the goods listed in appropriate schedules of exemptions, which were subject to normal customs duties, taxes and charges.  The lists of goods 
subject to restrictions from free trade regime were included in the Protocols on exemptions from 
free trade regime attached to the bilateral FTAs.  According to the relevant Protocols, the Republic 
of Kazakhstan had applied exemptions on import of alcoholic beverages (HS chapter 22, except for WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 266 - 
 
  codes 2201, 2202 and 2209), and tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes (HS chapter 24) 
from Azerbaijan and Ukraine; specified al coholic beverages (HS codes 2203, 2205, 2206 and 
2207), tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitu tes (HS chapter 24) and white sugar (HS tariff 
line 1701 99 100) from Georgia.  Currently, the Republic of Kazakhstan applied exemption on 
imports of rice (HS code 1006), alcoholic bevera ges (HS chapter 22, except for codes 2201, 2202 
and 2209), and tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes (HS chapter 24) originating from the Republic of Uzbekistan.  According to the resp ective Protocols, the Republic of Kazakhstan had 
reserved the right to apply duties on goods which were subject to export tariff regulation of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan when these goods were ex ported to the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of 
Moldova and the Republic of Tajiki stan.  The goods subject to export tariff regulation had been 
exempted from duty-free regime in trade betwee n the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation (Protocol of 22 October 1992).  Howeve r, those exemptions had never been used in 
practice, as the implementation of the Protocol  had been suspended.  The Protocol had been 
revoked by signing a new Protocol on Establishment of a Free Trade Regime without Exemptions 
and Restrictions on 20 January 1995. 
1163.  A Member said that the phase-out schedule for the restrictions, such as exemptions from 
free trade regime, had already been planned with the Republic of Uzbekistan and asked if the 
schedules for phasing out these restrictions with Ge orgia, Ukraine, the Republic of Azerbaijan, and 
the Republic of Moldova were also planned or requ ired further negotiations.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that, until now, there was no phase-out Protocol signed between the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Uzbekistan.  The phase-out Protocol had been signed with 
Georgia on 11 November 2004, based on which the exemptions from the free trade regime applied 
to imports from Georgia had been phased out on 1 April 2005.  According to the Protocol signed with the Republic of Azerbaijan on 24 May 2005,  the exemptions of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
from a free trade regime for imports of alcoholic beverages, tobacco and manufactured tobacco 
substitutes from the Republic of Azerbaijan had been phased out by 1 January 2012.  The Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Moldova had no t stipulated any import duty exemptions from a 
free trade regime, but had reserved the right to ap ply export duties in mutual trade.  She added 
that the Protocol on Exemptions had also been si gned between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Republic of Armenia of 2 September 1994.  This Protocol had been signed for a one-year period 
and had not been extended.  
1164.  The representative of Kazakhstan further informed Members that the CIS Free Trade 
Agreement 2011 had been signed on 18 October 2011 by the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian 
Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan and Ukraine.  The other CIS countries could join the 
Agreement later.  Upon its entry into force, the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 would replace the bilateral FTAs between the CIS countries and the Re public of Kazakhstan, and establish a CIS-wide 
preferential trade area.  In accordance with the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan applied exemptions from a free trade regime for imports of sugar and vodka from Ukraine.  The exemption for Ukrainian vodka was in force till 1 January 2015.  The exemption from a free trade regime for imports of sugar from Ukraine was also applied by the Russian Federation 
and the Republic of Belarus.  In turn, Ukraine also applied import duties for sugar originating from 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation  and the Republic of Belarus.  Within the CIS 
Free Trade Agreement 2011, the Republic of Kaza khstan had also reserved the right to apply 
duties for soybeans, rape or colza seeds and sunflower seeds, crude oil, light, medium and heavy 
oils, bitumen, natural and coal gases, petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons, raw hides and skins of bovine, sheep and lambs, wool and animal hair, ferrous, copper, and aluminum waste 
and scrap, rail, crossing piece, iron/steel, part of railway locomotives, certain aluminum products 
(i.e., powders and flakes, bars and profiles, foil, tubes, pipes, etc.), listed in Annex 1 to the Agreement, when these products were exported to  the other Parties of the Agreement, with the 
exception of the EAEU member States.  The CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 had created a 
uniform legal structure based on WTO rules.  The Agreement contained provisions stipulating, 
inter alia , substantial reduction with subsequent elimination of import customs duties and 
restrictions in mutual trade, commitments regulati ng the levels and application of export duties, 
application of safeguard measures in mutual trade, competition and subsidies rules, technical 
barriers to trade, SPS measures, an effective mechanism for dispute settlement, etc.  
1165.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify how the establishment of a uniform legal structure 
based on the WTO rules would be accomplished within the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011.  
This Member also asked Kazakhstan to clarify if the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 was WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 267 - 
 
  considered an extension of the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994 and to inform about the status of 
the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994 in ligh t of the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011. 
1166.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 
contained provisions confirming the obligations of the Parties to the Agreement to comply with the 
WTO rules.  Some provisions contained citation s and references to the GATT 1994 and the other 
WTO Agreements related to trade in goods.  For instance, the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 stipulated the following key principles based on WTO rules:  
- provision of national treatment for goods imported from the other Parties; 
- provision of freedom of transit through the territories of the Parties within the meaning of 
Article V of the GATT 1994;  
- general elimination of quantitative restrictions according to Article XI of the GATT 1994; 
- prohibition of subsidies contingent upon export performance or the use of domestic over 
imported goods; 
- application of trade remedies, SPS and TBT measures in accordance with the WTO rules, 
etc. 
1167.  She added that most specifically, Arti cle 5 of the CIS Free Trade Agreement  2011 
stipulated that the Parties should provide each other national treatment according to Article III of 
the GATT 1994.  In accordance with Article 5, th e Parties were committed to apply internal taxes, 
laws, regulation and requirements affecting the sale of imported products in a non-discriminatory manner to prevent protection to domestically-produced goods.  According to Article 10 of the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011, the Parties should not maintain or grant subsides prohibited under 
Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement.  The Parties that maintained prohibited subsidies had 
committed to phase out such measures after expiration of the transitional period stipulated in the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011.  She noted that under the Agreement, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan had reserved the right to maintain its local content requirements in:  (i) purchases of 
subsoil users, and enterprises partially or fully co ntrolled by the government, until these measures 
were phased out in accordance with Kazakhstan's commitments upon accession to the WTO; (ii) 
preferences granted under the free warehouse regime and special economic zones till 
1 January 2017; and (iii) tariff preferences gran ted under agreements on industrial assembly 
concluded in accordance with Order of the Deputy  Prime Minister - Minister of Industry and New 
Technologies No. 113 "On Certain Issues on Concluding, Conditions and Model Form of the 
Agreement on Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles  with Legal Entities - Residents of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 11 June 2010 – till 31 December 2020.  
1168.  Concerning the status of the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 had been concluded with the view to 
replace the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994.  Th e CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994 had not been 
fully implemented, as the establishment of a CIS- wide free trade area had not been completed.  
The CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994 had become  an overall framework agreement, and the 
CIS countries had built free trade areas based on bilateral agreements.  Therefore, the Agreement 
had been signed on 18 October 2011 with the objective to establish a free trade area among the CIS countries signatories to the Agreement, base d on the principles and provisions of the WTO 
rules.  She further explained that according to  Article 23 of the Agreement, the CIS Free Trade 
Agreement 1994 had ceased to apply in relations between Parties to the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011.  The bilateral agreements on free trade concluded between these Parties were 
also replaced by the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011.  However, the CIS Free Trade Agreement 
1994 as well as the bilateral FTAs remained in force in trade relations between the Parties to the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 and the CIS countr ies that had not signed the CIS Free Trade 
Agreement 2011, and those CIS countries that had signed but had not yet ratified the CIS Free 
Trade Agreement 2011. 
1169.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that in order to unify its trade regime with those 
of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Be larus, the Republic of Kazakhstan had signed a 
bilateral Free Trade Agreement with the Republic of Serbia on 7 October 2010 and was engaged in 
free trade negotiations with Montenegro.  In acco rdance with the  Free Trade Agreement with the 
Republic of Serbia, nearly all goods (including agricultural products) originating from the Republic 
of Serbia or the Republic of Kazakhstan enjoye d duty free regime when imported to the other 
country. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 268 - 
 
  1170.  She added that the Republic of Kazakhstan al so hoped to conclude more agreements on 
trade liberalisation along with the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation.  Currently, 
New Zealand, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and Viet Nam were in the process of 
negotiations aimed at concluding FTAs with the Republic of Kazakhstan and the other EAEU 
member States. 
1171.  A Member requested information on Kazakhstan's participation in the Economic 
Cooperation Organization Trade Agreement (E COTA), and on the plans of the Shanghai 
Cooperation Organization (SCO) to establish a free trade arrangement among its members 
by 2020.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Republic of Kazakhstan had joined the 
Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) in November 1992, but was not a member to the ECOTA and provided an MFN-based trade regime to ECO members.  In addition, four out of ECO's 
10 members were beneficiaries of the EAEU Ge neralized System of Tariff Preferences for 
Developing and Least Developed Countries.  The Republic of Kazakhstan had concluded bilateral free trade agreements with the remaining four ECO members: the Republic of Azerbaijan, the 
Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Tajikistan and the Republic of Uzbekistan.  She added that, at 
present, no plans existed to conclude a free trade agreement within the SCO.  
1172.  The representative of Kazakhstan also noted that the MFN regime was granted to all 
countries that had concluded bilateral non-preferential trade agreements with the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  Moreover, the Republic of Kazakhstan applied the MFN regime to all third countries regardless of the existence of a bilateral agreement with a particular country.  
1173.  A Member enquired whether the Republic of Kazakhstan participated in the Production 
Cooperation Agreement signed by all CIS countri es on 23 December 1993 in Ashkhabad and under 
what terms trade was conducted, and what portio n of the Republic of Kazakhstan's trade was 
conducted under this Agreement, in case the Republic of Kazakhstan participated in this 
Agreement.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Agreement on Common Rules and 
Mechanisms of Support for Production Cooperation Development of Enterprises and Industrial Sectors of CIS Countries, signed by the Republic of Kazakhstan on 23 December 1993, had 
entered into force on 10 May 1995.  The Agreement had been signed in order to preserve and 
promote the development of existing and newly created technological and cooperative relationships between enterprises of all forms of ownership, and industrial complexes of the CIS 
countries on the basis of their direct production li nkages during the period of the Union of Soviet 
Socialist Republics.  The Agreement envisaged non-application of import duties, taxes and 
quantitative restrictions with respect to goods, su pplied from the CIS customs territories within the 
cooperation
26 and within the framework of the customs regimes of processing27 and services 
rendered28.  The Agreement foresaw the conclusion of related inter-governmental, sectoral and 
inter-ministerial agreements.  Goods supplied within contracts concluded under the agreements could receive the aforementioned preferences.  However, the Republic of Kazakhstan had not 
concluded such inter-governmental, sectoral and inter-ministerial agreements, and therefore had 
not implemented the Production Cooperation Agreement in practice. 
1174.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at from the date of accession to the WTO 
Kazakhstan would observe relevant WTO provisions, including but not limited to Article XXIV of the 
WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 199 4 and Article V of the WTO General Agreement 
on Trade in Services, in its participation in pref erential trade agreements, and would ensure that 
the provisions of the WTO Agreements for notification, consultation and other requirements 
concerning free trade areas and customs unions were met from the date of accession.  
She confirmed that Kazakhstan would, upon accessio n, submit notifications and copies of its Free 
Trade Agreements, the EAEU Treaty and its sub- agreements to the WTO Committee on Regional 
Trade Agreements (CRTA).  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
                                               
26 Supplies within the cooperation mean supplies of raw materials, components , intermediate products 
and other articles used in technologicall y dependent productions of final goods. 
27 Supplies within the frameworks of customs regimes of processing mean supplies of goods in 
accordance with the customs legislation of the Parties to the Agreement. 
28 Services rendered mean projec ts, repair and maintenance services and technological operations. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 269 - 
 
  CONCLUSIONS 
1175.  The Working Party took note of the explanatio ns and statements of Kazakhstan concerning 
its foreign trade regime, as reflected in this Report.  The Working Party took note of the commitments by Kazakhstan in relation to certain specific matters which are reproduced in 
paragraphs 59, 87, 101, 142, 170, 208, 209, 250, 274, 288, 298, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 
311, 313, 317, 351, 359, 383, 431, 434, 435, 438, 439, 443, 445, 464, 467, 469, 483, 493, 521, 526, 527, 540, 559, 585, 590, 625, 631, 634, 641, 650, 651, 653, 657, 670, 704, 711, 712, 716, 
720, 721, 722, 724, 736, 738, 747, 753, 762, 764, 765, 766, 772, 777, 784, 785, 788, 789, 797, 
803, 812, 830, 833, 835, 838, 841, 848, 849, 856, 859, 872, 874, 875, 896, 897, 933, 934, 947, 949, 962, 986, 987, 988, 989, 1013, 1061, 1063, 1067, 1079, 1081, 1102, 1114, 1116, 1127, 1131, 1132, 1133, 1134, 1146, 1147, 1148, 1150, and 1174. The Working Party took note that 
these commitments had been incorporated in para graph 2 of the Protocol of Accession of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan to the WTO. 
1176.  Having carried out the examination of the foreign trade regime of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and in the light of the explanatio ns, commitments and concessions made by the 
representative of Kazakhstan, the Working Party reached the conclusion that the Republic of 
Kazakhstan be invited to accede to the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the WTO under the 
provisions of Article XII.  For this purpose, th e Working Party has prepared the draft Decision and 
Protocol of Accession reproduced in the Appendix to this report, and takes note of Kazakhstan's 
Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods (document WT/ACC/KAZ/93/Add.1) and its 
Schedule of Specific Commitments on Services (document WT/ACC/KAZ/93/Add.2) that are 
annexed to the Protocol.  It is proposed that these texts be adopted by the General Council when it 
adopts the Report.  When the Decision is adopte d, the Protocol of Accession would be open for 
acceptance by the Republic of Kazakhstan which would become a Member 30 days after it accepts 
the said Protocol.  The Working Party agreed, therefore, that it had completed its work concerning 
the negotiations for the accession of the Republ ic of Kazakhstan to the Marrakesh Agreement 
Establishing the WTO.  
 
_______________ 
  
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 270 - 
 
  ANNEX 1 
Laws, Regulations and other Information Prov ided to the Working Party by Kazakhstan 
LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
 
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES  
 
- Monetary and Fiscal Policy 
 
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law "On Currency Regulation" of 14 April 1993 (repealed by Law No. 54-I 
of 24 December 1996) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 54-I "On Currency Regulation" of 24 December 1996 (repealed by Law 
No. 57-III of 30 June 2005) WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.2,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1,  WT/ACC/KAZ/68,  WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Presidential Decree No. 2155 "On the National Bank of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995, which has the force of Law WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Regulation of the Board of the National Bank No. 182 "On the Settlements with 
Cheques" of 15 November 1994  WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Resolution of the Board of the National Bank No. 134 "On Approval of Rules of 
Currency Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 29 October 2005 (repealed by Resolution of the Board of the National Bank No. 129 of 11 December 2006) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
 
- Foreign Exchange and Payments  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 51 "On the Treaty on the Procedure for the Movement of Cash  Monetary Funds and/or Monetary 
Instruments by Natural Persons across the Customs Border of the Customs 
Union" of 5 July 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 237-I "On Payments and Money Transfers" of 29 June 1998 WT/ACC/KAZ/18 
Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1,  WT/ACC/KAZ/68,  WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Presidential Decree No. 2155 "On the National Bank of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995, which has the force of Law WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Presidential Decree No. 2227 "On Securities and Stock Exchange" of 21 April 
1995, which had the force of Law (repealed by Law No. 79-I of 5 March 1997) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Resolution of the Board of the National Bank No. 188 "On Rules for Conducting 
Currency Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 24 November 1994 WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
 
- Investment Regime  
Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 "On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 5 September 1995  WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Civil Code of Kazakhstan (General Part) No. 269-XII of 27 December 1994 (Table 
of Contents) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 136-I "On Pensions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 June 1997 
(repealed by Law No. 105-V of 21 June 2013) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998  WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 373-II "On Investments" of 8 January 2003 WT/ACC/KAZ/42, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 271 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/69 
Presidential Decree No. 2717 "On Land" of 22 December 1995, which had the 
force of Law (repealed by Law No. 153-II of 24 January 2001) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Presidential Decree No. 1096 "On Strate gy for Industrial and Innovation 
Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2003-2015" of 17 May 2003 (repealed by Presidential Decree No. 958 of 19 March 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 1219 "On Approval of the Plan of Activities on 
Development of Stock Market and Incr easing Investment Activeness of the 
Population on Stock Market for the year 2008" of 11 December 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
 
- State Ownership, State-Tradin g Entities and Privatization 
 
Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 5 September 1995  WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 156-XIII "On Transport in the Repu blic of Kazakhstan" of 21 September 
1994 WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 2255 "On Business Partnerships" of 2 May 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 68-III "On Production Sharing Agre ements in Offshore Oil Operations" of 
8 July 2005 (repealed by Law No. 100-IV of 10 February 2008) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Law No. 527-IV "On National Security of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
6 January 2012  WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Presidential Decree No. 2350 "On Oil" of 28 June 1995, which had the force of Law (repealed by Law No. 291-IV of 24 June 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Presidential Decree No. 2721 "On Privatization" of 23 December 1995, which had 
the force of Law (repealed by Law No. 413-IV "On State Property" of 1 March 2011) WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Presidential Decree No. 422 "On the List of State Property Objects Not Subject to 
Privatization" of 28 July 2000 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Regulation "On Approval of Rules of Purchasing of Goods, Services and Works for 
Oil Operations", approved by Government Resolution No. 1034 of 8 December 1992 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 779 of 4 August 2003) WT/ACC/KAZ/4  
Government Resolution No. 1587 "On the Schedule of Non-Privatizable State 
Property" of 24 October 2000 (as amended on 18 December 2003) WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 969 "On Draft Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On 
Production Sharing Agreemen ts in Offshore Oil Oper ations'" of 16 September 
2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 483 "On Some Issues of Republican State 
Ownership" of 11 June 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Draft Law "On Joint Stock Companies" of 4 June 1997  WT/ACC/KAZ/18 
Draft Law "On Limited Liability Partnerships" of 25 March 1997  WT/ACC/KAZ/18 
 
- Pricing Policies 
 
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998  WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/69 
Government Resolution No. 1171 "On Price Regulation for Products of Business Entities, Recognized as Natural Monopolists" of 19 October 1994 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 258 of 17 March 2003) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 376 "On Approval  of the Rules on Public Consultation 
in Considering Applications for Approval or Change of Natural Monopolies' Tariffs 
(Prices, Rates)" of 21 April 2003 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Order of the Chairman of the Agency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies, 
Protection of Competition and Support  of Small Businesses No. 24-OD "On 
Adoption of the Rules for Introduction and Discontinuation of Decreasing Coefficients for Tariffs on Regulated Rail Freight" of 12 December 1999 WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Add.1 
 
- Competition Policy  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Constitution of the Republic of Kazak hstan of 5 September 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 232-I "On Unfair Competition" of 9 June 1998 (repealed by Law No. 
112-IV "On Competition" of 25 December 2008)  WT/ACC/KAZ/18,  WT/ACC/KAZ/36/Add.2 
Law "On Development of Competition and Re striction of Monopolistic Activities" 
of 11 June 1991 (repealed by Law No. 184-II of 3 May 2001)    WT/ACC/KAZ/4 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 272 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Law No. 456-I "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of 
Goods" of 26 July 1999 WT/ACC/KAZ/23,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Law No. 9-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the Activity of Subjects of Natural Monopolies" of 9 December 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Law No. 34-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts on 
Issues of State Monopoly" of 10 July 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/76 
 
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES 
 
 - Powers of Executive, Legislative an d Judicial Branches of Government 
 
Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 5 September 1995  WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
 - Framework of the Eurasian Economic Union am ong the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian 
Federation and the Republic of Belarus 
 
Treaty on the Establishment of Common Customs Territory and the Formation of the Customs Union of 6 December 2007 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Treaty on the Functioning of the Customs Union in the Framework of the 
Multilateral Trading System of 19 May 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/68,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/69 
Decision of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council No. 1 "On the Regulation of the Work of the Eurasian Economic Commission" of 18 November 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Protocol "On the Rules of Entry into Forc e of International Treaties Comprising 
the Legal Basis of the Customs Union, Withdrawal from Them and Accession to Them" of 6 October 2007 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Statute of the Court of the Eurasian Econ omic Community, appr oved by Decision 
of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 122 of 27 April 2003 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
List of International Treaties which Fo rmed Contractual and Legal Base of the 
Customs Union, approved by Decision of  the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 14 
of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the EurAsEC Intergovernmenta l Council No. 15 "On the Issues of the 
Organization of Functioning of the Commission of the Customs Union" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 534 of 9 December 2010 "On the 
Treaty on Judicial Recourse to the EurAsEC Court of the Economic Operators on Disputes within the Framework of the Customs Union and Peculiarities of the Judicial Procedure on Them" WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 308 "On Regulation on Introduction of 
Changes on Control Measures of Foreign Trade in the Customs Union Commission 
(as in force on the Customs Union Commission No. 553 of 2 March 2011)" of 18 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Code "On Administrative Offences" of 22 March 1984, as amended on 
1 April 1995 (repealed by Code No. 155-II "On Administrative Offences" of 30 January 2001) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 536-IV "On Ratification of the Treaty on 
the Eurasian Economic Commission" of 10 January 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
 
- Government Entities Responsible for Making and Implementing Policies Affecting Foreign 
Trade; Right of Appeal 
 
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
Law No. 221-III "On Order of Review of Requests of Natural and Juridical 
Persons" of 12 January 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Presidential Decree No. 2340 "On Procedure for Review of Formal Requests from 
Citizens" of 19 June 1995, which had the force of Law (repealed by Law No. 221-III of 12 January 2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 273 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
 
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS 
 
 
- Registration Requirements for Import and Export Operations  
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU Agreement on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of 
Third Countries of 25 January 2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
CU Agreement on Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise Trade of 9 July 
2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015)    WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Regulation "On the Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs 
Union and Removal from the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Encryption (Cryptographic) Means", approv ed by Decision of  the EEC Collegium 
No. 134 of 16 August 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1,  WT/ACC/KAZ/68,  WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Law No. 214-III "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Presidential Decree No. 2198 "On State Registration of Juridical Persons and Statistical Record-Keeping and Registration of Bran ches and Representative 
Offices" of 17 April 1995, which has the force of Law  WT/ACC/KAZ/4, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 578 "On Ce rtain Issues of Export and Import 
Licensing of Goods" of 12 June 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 57 "On Cert ain Issues of Acti vity Licensing for 
Production of Ethyl Spirits and Production , Storage, Wholesale and/or Retail Sale 
of Alcohol Products Except for Storage, Wholesale and/or Retail Sale of Alcohol Products within the Territory of Production" of 29 January 2013 WT/ACC/KAZ/77/Add.1 
 
A. IMPORT REGULATIONS  
 - Ordinary Customs Duties  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU Agreement on Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of 25 January 2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
CU Agreement on Rules of the Origin of Goods, Originating from Developing and 
Least developed Countries of 12 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 18 "On Common Customs and 
Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 "On Common Customs and Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 2368 "On Customs Regulation in th e Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 July 
1995,  as amended on 5 July 2000 (repealed by Law No. 401-II of 5 April 2003) WT/ACC/KAZ/36,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.2 
Law No. 62-III "On Amendments and A ddenda to the Customs Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 June 2005 (repealed by Law No. 298-IV of 30 June 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Law No. 211-III "On Amendments and Addenda to the Customs Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 8 January 2007 (repealed by Law No. 298-IV of 30 June 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 1009 "On the Approval of the List of Countries which 
are Beneficiaries from the Preference Scheme of Kazakhstan" of 20 July 1995 
(repealed by Government Resolution No. 1389 of 14 November 1996) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 274 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Government Resolution No. 1125 "On the Rates of Customs Duties on Imported 
Goods" of 15 August 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No.1389 of 14 
November 1996) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1389 "On Rates of Customs Duties on Imported 
Goods" of 14 November 1996 WT/ACC/KAZ/8 
Government Resolution No. 891 "On Rates of Customs Duties on Imported 
Goods" of 29 June 2001 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 765 of 14 August 2006) WT/ACC/KAZ/36 
Government Resolution No. 524 "On Approval of the List of Goods Transported 
Through the Republic of Kazakhstan wi th Obligatory Securing of Payment of 
Customs Duties and Taxes" of 4 June 2003 (repealed by Government Resolution 
No. 272 of 25 March 2011) WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Draft Customs Code of Kazakhstan  WT/ACC/KAZ/39 
 - Other Duties and Charges  
Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 18 "On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 "On Common Customs and Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
 
- Tariff Exemptions  
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Protocol "On Conditions and Procedure fo r Use in Exceptional Cases of the Rates 
of Import Customs Duties  Other than Common Cust oms Tariff Rates" of 12 
December 2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 18 "On Common Customs and 
Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 "On Common Customs and Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 401-II of 5 April 2003 (repealed 
by Law No. 296-IV of 30 June 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/39/Rev.1,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
 - Tariff Rate Quotas  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU Agreement on Regime and Implementa tion of Tariff Quota of 12 December 
2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
Decision of the CU Commission No. 865 "On the List of Goods in Respect of 
Which from 1 January 2012, Tariff Rate Quotas as well as Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas are Established for Imports into  the Territory of the Customs Union 
Member Countries" of 18 November 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Government Resolution No. 269 "On Certain Issues of Allocation of Tariff Rate 
Quotas Volumes for Importation of Ce rtain Kinds of Meat" of 24 March 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 229 "On the List of Products, with respect to 
which Tariff Rate Quotas, and the Volu mes of Tariff Rate Quotas to the 
Territories of the member States of the Customs Union and Common the Single 
Economic Space for 2013 are Established" of 20 November 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 336 "On Certain Issues of Allocation of Tariff Rate 
Quotas Volumes for Importat ion of Certain Kinds of Meat among Participants of 
Foreign Trade Activity for 2012" of 15 March 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Government Resolution No. 1085 "On Amendments and Addenda to Government 
Resolution No. 336 'On Certain Issues of Allocation of Tariff Rate Quota Volumes 
for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat among Participants of Foreign Economic 
Activity for 2012' of 15 March 2012" of 24 August 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.3 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 275 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
 
- Fees and Charges for Services Rendered 
 
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009  WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decree of the President No. 2369 "On the Implementation of Presidential Decree 
"On the Customs Regulation in the Republ ic of Kazakhstan", which has the force 
of Law" of 20 July 1995 (repealed by President Decree No. 829 of 18 June 2009) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Presidential Decree No. 2370 "On the Introduction of Amendments to Certain 
Legislative Acts and Decrees on Customs Issues" of 20 July 1995, which has the force of Law WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1479 "On Rates of Customs Fees" of 7 November 
1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 669 of 8 July 2003) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 669 "On Adop tion of the Customs Charges, Charges 
and Fees Levied by Customs Bodies" of 8 July 2003 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 24 of 21 January 2011) WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 202 "On Amendments to Resolution No. 669 of 8 
July 2003 'On Adoption of Rates of Customs Charges, Charges and Fees Levied by Customs Bodies'" of 24 March 2006 (repealed by Government Resolution No.171 of 20 February 2008) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 24 "On Adoption  of Rates of Customs Fees Levied by 
Customs Bodies" of 21 January 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
 
- Application of Internal Taxes to Imports 
 
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU Agreement on the Principles of Indire ct Tax Collection at Export and Import 
of Goods, Performing Works and Renderin g Services in the Customs Union of 25 
January 2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Protocol "On the  Procedure of Levying  Indirect Taxes upon Performing Works 
and Rendering Services in the Customs Union" of 11 December 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Protocol "On the Procedure of Collection of Indirect Taxes and on the Mechanism 
of Carrying out the Control over their Payment while Exporting/Importing Goods 
from/to the Customs Union" of 11 December 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Protocol "On Amending the Agreement on the Principles of Collection of Indirect 
Taxes on Exports and Imports of Goods, Performing Works and Rendering Services in the Custom Union" of 11 December 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 209-II "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 12 June 2001 (repealed by Law No. 100-IV of 10 December 2008) WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.2, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/36 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 11-III "On Amendments and Addend a to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Taxation" of 13 December 2004 (repealed by Law No. 100-IV of 10 December 2008) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Law No. 23-III "On International Commercial Arbi tration" of 28 December 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Presidential Decree No. 2703 "On the Introduction of Amendments to Certain 
Legislative Acts and Decrees" of 21 December 1995, which has the force of Law WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Presidential Decree No. 2827 "On the Introduction of Amendments to Presidential 
Decree 'On Taxes and Other Compulsory Payments to the Budget'" of 26 January 1996, which had the force of Law WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 960 "On the Rates of Excise Taxes on Imported 
Excisable Goods and the Quotas of Transfer by Natural Persons through the Customs Boundary of Kazakhstan of Exci sable Goods which Are not Subject to 
Excise Duties" of 13 July 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1747 of 31 December 1996) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 974 "On the Rates of Excise Taxes on Excisable 
Goods Manufactured in Kazakhstan and the Gambling Business" of 14 July 1995 (repealed by Resolution No. 1747 of 31 December 1996) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1397 "On the Intr oduction of Amendments and WT/ACC/KAZ/4 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 276 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Addenda to Government Resolution No. 960 of 13 July 1995" of 30 October 1995 
(repealed by Government Resolution No. 819 of 28 June 1996) 
Government Resolution No. 1439 "On the Rates of Excise Duties on Certain Types of Excisable Goods Imported to the Territory of Kazakhstan" of 2 November 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 819 of 28 June 1996)  WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1487 "On the Introduction of Amendments and 
Additions to Government Resolution No. 974 of 14 July 1995" of 8 November 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1747 of 31 December 1996) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 341 "On Intr oduction of Amendments and Addenda 
to some Decisions of the Government" of 25 March 1996 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1747 of 31 December 1996) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 608 of 26 June 1998, Appendix 1: "Excise Taxes for 
the Excisable Goods Imported to the Customs Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" (repealed by Government  Resolution No. 217 of 9 March 2005) WT/ACC/KAZ/18 
Government Resolution No. 556 "On Proc edure for Offsetting due Value Added 
Tax to Importers of Goods to Kazakhsta n Under the International Agreement on 
Different Taxation of Export and Import of Goods" of 22 May 2002 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 1035 "On Amendments to Government Resolution 
No. 137 of 28 January 2000 'On Excise Rates on Excised Goods Produced in the Republic of Kazakhstan and Imported to th e Customs Territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, Sold on the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and on 
Gambling Industry'" of 15 October 2005 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1332 of 31 December 2008)     WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 1075 "On Approval of the List of Taxpayers who 
Benefited from VAT Exemptions on Import  of Goods within the Framework of 
Contract for Subsoil Use on  the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 11 
November 2006 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1326 of 31 December 2008) WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Order of the Customs Committee No. 131 "On the Procedure for Application of 
Value Added Tax and Excise Taxes to Goods which are Imported into the 
Customs Territory of Kazakhstan" of 29 September 1995 (repealed by Joint Order of the Tax Committee No. 82 of 27 August 1999 and the Customs 
Committee No. 153 of 1 September 1999) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
 
- Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions, Quotas and Licensing Systems  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU Agreement on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of 
Third Countries of 25 January 2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
CU Agreement on the Procedure for Intr oduction and Application of Measures 
Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods on the Common Customs Territory in Respect 
of Third Countries of 9 June 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
CU Agreement on the Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise 
Trade of 9 July 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015)    WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Regulation "On the Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs 
Union and Removal from the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Encryption (Cryptographic) Means", approv ed by Decision of  the EEC Collegium 
No. 134 of 16 August 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 103 "On Amendments to the Regulation on 
Application of Restrictions" of 14 May 2013 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.3 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 2200 "On Licensing" of 17 April 1995 (repealed by Law No. 214-III of 
11 January 2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 45-III "On Amendments and Addend a to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Licensing" of 15 April 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Law No. 214-III "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Presidential Decree No. 2720 "On the Introduction of Amendments and Addenda 
to Certain Presidential Decrees" of 23 December 1995, which has the force of Law WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1035 "On the Approval of the List of Exchange 
Commodities" of 28 July 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1492 of 5 December 1996) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 277 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Government Resolution No. 1894 "On the Implementation of Presidential Decree 
No. 2201 "On Licensing" of 17 April 1995" of 29 December 1995 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No. 753 of 7 June 2012) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 298 "On the Procedure for Export and Import of 
Public Goods (Works, Services) in K azakhstan" of 12 March 1996 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No. 1037 of 30 June 1997) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 304 "On Intr oduction of Amendments and Addenda 
to Government Resolution No. 1035 of 28 July 1995" of 13 March 1996 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1253 of 12 August 2000) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 342 "On the Approval of the List of Goods Allowed 
and not Allowed to the Regime of Temp orary Import and Export" of 25 March 
1996 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 668 of 8 July 2003) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1324 "On Amen dments into Government Resolution 
No. 1660 'On Approval of Fee Rates for State Registration of Juridical Persons of 19 December 2001'" of 30 December 2005 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1332 of 31 December 2008) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 1334 "On Amendments to Resolution of the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhsta n No. 100 'On Approval of Licensing Fee 
Rates for the Right to Perform Certain Types of Activities' of 24 January 2002" of 31 December 2005 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 610 of 9 August 2007)  WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 578 "On Ce rtain Issues of Export and Import 
Licensing of Goods" of 12 June 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 440 "On Approv al of Qualification Requirements for 
Licensing Activity on Development and Sale (including another Transfer) of Means of Cryptographic Protection of Information" of 10 January 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 711 "On Appr oval of the Rules on Importation and 
Exportation of Medicines, Products of Medical Purposes and Medical Equipment" 
of 31 May 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/77/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 57 "On Cert ain Issues of Acti vity Licensing for 
Production of Ethyl Spirits and Production , Storage, Wholesale and/or Retail Sale 
of Alcohol Products Except for Storage, Wholesale and/or Retail Sale of Alcohol Products within the Territory of Production" of 29 January 2013 WT/ACC/KAZ/77/Add.1 
Draft Law "On Licensing"  WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
List of Goods Subject to Non-Ta riff Measures  WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Add.2 
 
- Customs Valuation  
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
CU Agreement on the Determination of Customs Value of Goods, Transferred 
Across Customs Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Protocol "On Amendments and Addenda to the Agreement on the Determination 
of Customs Value of Goods, Transferred Across Customs Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008"  of 23 April 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 53 "On Amendment to the Rules of Application 
of Method on Determination of Customs Value of Goods According to the Transaction Value of Imported Goods (Method 1) and the Termination of the Recommendation of the EEC Collegium No. 1 of 20 June 2012" of 26 March 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 202 "On Rules of Application of Methods on 
Determination of Customs Value of Goods According to the Transaction Value of 
Identical Goods (Method 2) and According to the Transaction Value of Similar Goods (Method 3)" of 30 October 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 214 "On Rules of Application of Method on Determination of Customs Value of Goods According to the Deductive Value Method (Method 4)" of 13 November 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 273 "On Rules of Application of Method on 
Determination of Customs Value of Goods According to the Computed Value Method (Method 5)" of 12 December 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 283 "On Application of Methods on 
Determination of Customs Value of Goods According to the Transaction Value of 
Imported Goods (Method 1)" of 20 December 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 401-II of 5 April 2003 (repealed 
by Law No. 296-IV of 30 June 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/39/Rev.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 278 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 221-III "On Order of Review of Requests of Natural and Juridical 
Persons" of 12 January 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Presidential Decree No. 2155 "On the National Bank of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 
1995, which has the force of Law WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
 
- Rules of Origin  
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
CU Agreement on Common Rules for Determ ining the Country of Origin of Goods 
of 25 January 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
CU Agreement on Rules of the Origin of Goods, Originating from Developing and 
Least developed Countries of 12 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 "On Common Customs and Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 401-II of 5 April 2003 (repealed 
by Law No. 296-IV of 30 June 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/39/Rev.1,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Order of the Chairman of the Customs Control Agency of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 209 "On Approval of Rules for Filling in Customs Value Declaration Forms and Rules for Filling in Customs Value Correction Forms" of 15 May 2003 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Order of the Chairman of the Customs Control Agency of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 210 "On Approval of Rules on Preliminary Decisions and Their Form" of 15 May 2003 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
 
- Other Customs Formalities  
CU Agreement on the Introduction and Application of Measures Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods on the Common Customs Territory in  Respect of Third 
Countries of 9 June 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1,  WT/ACC/KAZ/68,  WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
 - Preshipment Inspection  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU Agreement on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of 
Third Countries of 25 January 2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
CU Agreement on the Introduction and Application of Measures Concerning 
Foreign Trade in Goods on the Common Customs Territory in  Respect of Third 
Countries of 9 June 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
 
- Anti-dumping, Countervailing Duty and Safeguard Regimes  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Law No. 337-I "On Measures to Protect the Domestic Market upon Importation of Goods" of 28 December 1998 WT/ACC/KAZ/20,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Law No. 421-I "On Anti-Dumping Measures" of 13 July 1999 WT/ACC/KAZ/23 
Law No. 441-I "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures" of 16 July 1999   WT/ACC/KAZ/23 
Law No. 114-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Subsidies,  Countervailing and Anti-Dumping 
Measures" of 9 January 2006 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 279 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Government Resolution No. 1374 "On Approval of the Rules for Conducting 
Investigation prior to Introduction of  Safeguard, Countervailing and Anti-
Dumping Measures" of 9 September 2000 WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Draft Law "On Safeguard Measures" WT/ACC/KAZ/13 
Draft Law "On Anti-Dumping" WT/ACC/KAZ/13 
Draft Law "On Subsidies and Count ervailing Measures" WT/ACC/KAZ/13 
 
B. EXPORT REGULATIONS  
 
- Customs Tariffs, Fees and Char ges for Services Rendered, Application of Internal Taxes to 
Exports 
 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Government Resolution No. 810 "On the Amendments to Government Resolution 
No. 299 of 12 March 1996" of 28 June 1996 (repealed by Government Resolution 
No. 124 of 9 February 2005) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
 
- Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU Agreement on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of 
Third Countries of 25 January 2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
 
- Export Licensing Procedures  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU Agreement on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of 
Third Countries of 25 January 2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
CU Agreement on the Procedure for Intr oduction and Application of Measures 
Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods on the Common Customs Territory in Respect 
of Third Countries of 9 June 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
CU Agreement on the Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise 
Trade of 9 July 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015)    WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 2200 "On Licensing" of 17 April 1995 (repealed by Law No. 214-III of 
11 January 2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 9-I "On Export Controls" of 18 June 1996 (repealed by Law No. 300-III 
of 21 July 2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 45-III "On Amendments and Addend a to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Licensing" of 15 April 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Law No. 214-III "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Presidential Decree No. 2720 "On the Introduction of Amendments and Addenda 
to Certain Presidential Decrees" of 23 December 1995, which has the force of 
Law WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 298 "On the Procedure for Export and Import of 
Public Goods (Works, Services) in Kazak hstan" of 12 March 1996 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No. 1037 of 30 June 1997) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 342 "On the Approval of the List of Goods Allowed 
and not Allowed to the Regime of Temp orary Import and Export" of 25 March 
1996 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 668 of 8 July 2003) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1894 "On the Implementation of Presidential Decree 
No. 2201 'On Licensing' of 17 April 1995" of 29 December 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 753 of 7 June 2012) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
 
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECTING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS   
 
- Industrial Policy, including Subsidies  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 280 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 266-XIII "On Foreign Investment s" of 27 December 1994 (repealed by 
Law No. 373-II "On Investments" of 8 January 2003) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 178-II "On the Development Bank of Kazakhstan" of 25 April 2001 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Law No. 373-II "On Investments" of 8 January 2003 WT/ACC/KAZ/42, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1,  WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Presidential Decree No. 1815 "On Establishment of the State Export-Import Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1994 (repealed by Presidential Decree No. 1696 of 9 January 2006) WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 1017 "On Approval of Rules of Partial Reimbursement of Costs to Entities of Industrial and Innovative Activity On Promotion of Domestically Processed Good s and Services to External Markets, 
the List of Domestically Processed G oods and Services Subject to Partial 
Reimbursement of External Markets Promotion Costs, and the Repeal of Some 
Resolutions of the Government of the Re public of Kazakhstan" of 2 August 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.3, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
Order of the Acting Chairman of the Agency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies and Protection of Competition No. 375-OD "On Rules Governing Application and Discontinuation of Temporary Decreasing Coefficients and Ta riffs for Mainline 
Railway Transportation" of 8 September 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
 
-  Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification   
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
EurAsEC Agreement on the Basics of Harmonization of Technical Regulations of the Eurasian Economic Community Members of 24 March 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1  
CU Agreement on Uniform Principles and Rules of Technical Regulation in the 
Republic of Belarus, the Republic of K azakhstan and the Russian Federation of 18 
November 2010 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Agreement on Common Principles and Ru les for the Circulation of Medical 
Devices (Medical Products and Medical Equipment) in the Framework of the 
Eurasian Economic Union of 23 December 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 321 "On Recommendations on 
Model  Structure of Technical Regulation  of the Eurasian Economic Community" 
of 27 October 2006 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
"Procedure for Development of Technical Regulations of the Eurasian Economic 
Community", approved by Decision of the EurAsEC Integration Committee 
No. 1175 of 17 August 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Schedule of Development of Priority Technical Regulations of the Customs Union, 
approved by Decision of the CU Commission No. 492 of 8 December 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 526 "On Unified List of Products, in Respect 
of Which Mandatory Requirements Are Established Within the Framework of the Customs Union" of 28 January 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 620 "  On the New Version of  the Unified List 
of Products Subject to Mandatory Conf ormity Assessment (Confirmation of 
Compliance) within the Framework of the CU with Issuance of Single Documents, approved by CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010" of 7 April 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 621 "On the Regulation on the Application 
Application of Model Schemes of Conformi ty Assessment (Confirmation) in the 
Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" of 7 April 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 17 "On Amendments to the Unified List of 
Products Subject to Mandatory Conformity  Assessment (Confirm ation) within the 
Framework of the Customs Union with the Issuance of Common Documents"  of 5 April 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/71/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 57 "On Amendments to the Regulation on the 
Procedure of Formation of the List of International and Regional (Interstate) 
Standards, and Case of their Absence - the National (State) Standards which Ensure Compliance with Requirements of the Technical Regulations of the Customs Union and Required for Conformi ty Assessment (Confirmation)" of 31 
May 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/71/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Council No. 102 " Оn Amendments to the Unified List of 
Products for which Mandatory Requiremen ts are Established within the Customs 
Union" of 23 November 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 281 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Decision of the EEC Council No. 103 "On Approval of the Schedule of 
Development of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union for 2012-2013" of 
23 November 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Council No. 245 "On Draft Protocol on Amending the 
Agreement on Common Principles and Ru les of Technical Regulation in the 
Republic of Belarus, Republic of K azakhstan and Russian Federation of 18 
November 2010" of 4 December 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Council No. 294 "On Regulation on the Procedures for 
Importation to the Customs Union Territory  of Goods (Products) in Respect of 
which Mandatory Requirements Are Established within the Customs Union" of 25 
December 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 306 "On Approval of the Regulation on 
Procedures for Development and Approval of Lists of International and Regional 
Standards, and, in their Absence, Nati onal (State) Standards of Customs Union 
Member States, that  Ensure Compliance with Technical Regulations of the Customs Union and Necessary for Co nducting Conformity Assessment 
(Confirmation)" of 25 December 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Council No. 48 "On Regulation on Development, Adoption, 
Amendment and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" of 20 June 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/71/Add.1 
Law No. 640-XII "On the Protection of Consumer Rights" of 5 June 1991 (repealed by Law No. 274-IV of 4 May 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law "On Standardization and Certification" of 18 January 1993 (repealed by Law 
603-II of 9 November 2004) WT/ACC/KAZ/4  
Law No. 434-I "On Certification" of 16 July 1999 (repealed by Law No. 603-II 
of 9 November 2004) WT/ACC/KAZ/23 
Law No. 603-II "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Law No. 209-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Technical Regulation" of 29 December 2006 WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Law No. 302-III "On Safety of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Law No. 305-III "On Safety of Machinery and Equipment" of 21 July 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Law No. 306-III "On Safety of Toys" of 21 July 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 411 "On Stage-by-Stage Introduction of Compulsory 
Certification of Pr oducts (Works, Services) in Kazakhstan" of 20 May 1993 
(repealed by Government Resolution No. 1112 of 15 September 1997) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 225 "On the Committee for Standardization, 
Metrology and Certification" of 21 February 1996 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 851 of 20 May 1997) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Regulation No. 1112 "On Approval of List of Goods (Works, 
Services) Subject to Mandatory Certification for Conformity to Obligatory Requirements of Standards or Other Docu ments for Guarantee of Safety of Life 
and Health of Citizens, Property of Citizens, and Environment" of 15 July 1997 (Excerpt) (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1787 of 29 November 2000) WT/ACC/KAZ/14 
Joint Order of the Ministry of  Industry and Trade,  the Mi nistry of Agriculture and  
the Ministry of Health No. 145/327/528 "On the Establishment of the Single Enquiry Point for Interaction with the WTO Members on Technical Barriers to Trade and Sanitary and Phytosanitary Me asures" of 16 and 23 June, and 7 July 
2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/56 
"Statute of the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry 
of Industry and Trade", approved by Government Resolution No. 1237 of 26 November 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 367 "On Mandatory Conformity Assessment of 
Products in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 April 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 718 "On the Ru les of Creation and Functioning  of 
the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS" of 11 July 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Decree of the Prime Minister No. 64-r "O n Implementation Measures of the Law 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Technical Regulation'" of 25 March 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order of the Customs Administration und er the Ministry of  Finance No. 1 "On 
Customs Control Over Products which are Su bject to Compulsory Certification" of 
18 January 1994 WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Gosstandart Ordinance No. 156 "On the State Standard of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan: National Cert ification System ST RK  3.10-97 'Procedure for 
Processing of Appeals'" of 1 July 1999 WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 282 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Order No. 94 of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On Approval of the Form, 
Regulations of Filling in and Submission of Notifications of the Informational 
Centre on Technical Barriers to Trade, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures" of 
1 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 319 of 14 September 2012) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order No. 98 of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Ministry of  Industry and Trade "On Approval of the Regulations 
of Elaboration, Co-ordination, Registra tion, Approval, Examination, Alteration, 
Annulment and Implementation of the State Standards and Classifiers of 
Technical and Economic Information" of 4 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 172 of 29 March 2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order No. 99 of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Ministry of  Industry and Trade "On Approval of the Regulations 
of Establishment, Operation and Liquidation of the Technical Committees on Standardization" of 4 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 42 of 23 April 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order No. 106 of the Acting Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation 
and Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On Approval of the Regulations of Elaboration and Approval of Plans and Programs of the State Standardization" of 15 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 41 of 23 April 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order No. 107 of the Acting Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation 
and Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On Approval of the Regulations on Publication and Provid ing of Users with the Standards and 
Normative Instruments in the Field of Standardization, Metrology, Certification, Accreditation, Catalogues and Director ies of Standards and Information About 
Them" of 15 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 318 of 14 September 2012) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order of the Minister of Industry and New Technologies of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 318 "On Approval of Rules of Distribution and Providing Users with Official Publications of Re gulating Technical Documents" of 
14 September 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
Order No. 118 of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Ministry of  Industry and Trade "On Approval of the Regulations 
of Training and Attestation of the Ex perts-Auditors on Standardization, 
Conformity Verification and Accreditation" of 22 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 305 of 20 July 2006) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order No. 119 of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of 22 April 2005: (a) "On Rules of Suspension or Cancellation of the Validity of Issued 
Certificates of Conformity or the Validity of Registration of Conformity Declarations"; 
(b) "On Rules of Conducting Inspecti ons by the Accredited Conformity 
Assessment Body"; and,  
(c) "On Rules of Recognition of Certificates of Conformity of Foreign 
Countries, Test Protocols, Conformity Marks and Other Documents Issued in Foreign Systems of Conformity Assessment" WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order No. 135 of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Ministry of  Industry and Trade "On Approval of the Regulations 
of Registration and Implementation of the International, Regional, National 
Standards, Classifiers of Technical and Economic Informatio n, Regulations and 
Recommendations of the Foreign States in the Field of Standardization, Conformity Verification and Accreditation Within the Territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 13 May 2005 (repealed by Order No. 39 of 23 April 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order No. 136 of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Ministry of  Industry and Trade "On Approval of the Regulations 
on Conducting Works with Participation of the State Authorities, Technical Committees on Standardization and the Conformity Verification Agencies in the field of Conformity Verification and Accreditation" of 13 May 2005 (repealed by Order No. 172 of 29 March 2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
List of Products (Works, Services) that are Subject to Mandat ory Certification as 
to the Conformity with Requirements of  Standards or Other Codes that Ensure 
the Safety for Life, Health of People, Property of Citizens, and Environment WT/ACC/KAZ/14 
Draft Agreement on Cooperation of CU member States in the Field of Circulation 
of Pharmaceuticals  To be deposited 
Draft Law "On Certification" WT/ACC/KAZ/21 
Draft Law "On Standardisation" WT/ACC/KAZ/21 
Draft Law "On Safety of Toys" WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Draft Government Resolution "On Electromag netic Compatibility"  WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 283 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
 
- Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
 
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU Commission Decision No. 299 "On the Application of Sanitary Measures in the Customs Union" of 28 May 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
CU Commission Decision No. 317 "On the Application of Veterinary-Sanitary 
Measures in the Customs Union" of 18 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
CU Commission Decision No. 318 "On Providing Plant Quarantine in the Customs 
Union" of 18 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
CU Commission Decision No. 607 "On Common Forms of Veterinary Certificates 
on Regulated Goods Imported into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Re public of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation from Third Countries" of 7 April 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
CU Commission Decision No. 625 "On Ensuring of Harmonization of Legal Acts of 
the Customs Union in the Sphere of Sa nitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary 
Measures with International Standards" of 7 April 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
CU Commission Decision No. 721 "On Application of International Standards, 
Recommendations and Guidelines" of 22 June 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
CU Commission Decision No. 726 of "On Veterinary Measures" of 15 July 2011 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
CU Commission Decision No. 834 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint 
Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 18 October 2011  
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 161 "On Consultative Committee on Technical 
Regulation, Application of Sanitary, Vete rinary and Phytosanitary Measures" of 
18 September 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Council No. 226 "On Repealing Some Decisions of the CU 
Commission with Regard to Adoption of Declaration of Conformity of Products with Mandatory Requirements within the Customs Union of Common Form" of 13 November 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Decision of the EEC Collegium No. 294 "On Introduction of Amendments to 
Certain Decisions of the Customs Union Commission" of 10 December 2013 To be deposited 
Decision of the EEC Council No. 94 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint 
Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" of 9 October 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/89 
Decision of the EEC Council No. 95 "On Introduction of Amendments into 
Regulation on Common Procedure for Carrying Out Veterinary Control at the Customs Border of the Customs Union and Customs Territory of the Customs Union" of 9 October 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/89 
Law "On the Protection of the Natural Environment" of 18 June 1991 (repealed 
by Law No. 160-I of 15 July 1997) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 111-I "On Protection of the Health of Citizens in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 19 May 1997 (repealed by Law No. 170-III of 7 July 2006) WT/ACC/KAZ/62 
Law No. 160-I "On Environment Protection" of 15 July 1997 (repealed by the 
Environmental Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 212-III of 9 January 
2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/62 
Law No. 334-I "On Plant Quarantine" of 11 February 1999 WT/ACC/KAZ/20,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/62 
Law No. 422-I "On Legal Protection of Selective Breeding Achievements" of 13 July 1999 WT/ACC/KAZ/23 
Law No. 331-II "On Plant Protection" of 3 July 2002 WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002 WT/ACC/KAZ/36/Add.3, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Law No. 361-II "On Sanitary and Epidemiolo gical Well-Being of the Population" of 
4 December 2002 (repealed by Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On Public Health and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Law No. 430-II "On Healthcare System" of 4 June 2003 (repealed by Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On Public Health and Healthcare System" 
of 18 September 2009) WT/ACC/KAZ/62 
Law No. 543-II "On Quality and Safety of Food Products" of 8 April 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Law No. 13-III "On Amendments and Addend a to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Separation of Authorities between the Levels of State 
Governance and Budget Relations" of 20 December 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 284 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Law No. 8-III "On Amendments and Addenda to the Law of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan 'On Environment Protection' on In dustrial and Consumption Waste" 
of 1 January 2005 (repealed by the Environmental Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 212-III of 9 January 2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Law No. 301-III "On Food Safety" of 21 July 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 637 "On Approval of the Regulation on the State 
Ecological Appraisal in Kazakhsta n" of 25 October 1991 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No. 781 of 27 July 2005) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1891 "On Approval of the Order of Destruction or 
Further Reprocessing Products in the Case of their Recognition as not Suitable for 
Sale and Consumption" of 29 December 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1411 of 19 September 2009) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1295 "On Approval of the List of Quarantine 
Facilities, Alien Species and Extremely Dangerous Pests" of 10 December 2002 WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 407 "On Approval of Regulatory Legal Acts in the 
Sphere of Veterinary" of 28 April 2003 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
"List of Highly Contagious Animal Diseases when Compulsory Seizure and 
Destruction of Animals, Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin, which Constitute High Danger to Animal and Human Health are to be Held", approved by Government Resolution No. 407 "On Approval of Regulatory Legal Acts in the Sphere of Veterinary" of 28 April 2003 WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 132 "On Approval  of Rules for Issuance of Permit for 
Exportation, Importation and Transit of Objects with Regard to Evaluation of 
Epizootic Situation in the Territory" of 19 January 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Order of the Minister of Agriculture No. 166 "On Approval of the Nomenclature of 
the Basic Quarantine Products, subject to Phytosanitary Control under Plants 
Quarantine" of 30 May 2002 (repealed by Order of the Minister of Agriculture No. 10-1/52 of 13 February 2012) WT/ACC/KAZ/63/Add.1 
Order of the Minister of Agriculture No . 10-1/52 "On Recognizing Some Orders of 
the Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan as Repealed" 
of 13 February 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
Order of the Minister of Agriculture No. 16-04/647 "On Approval of Rules of 
Issuance of Permits for Exportation, Importation and Transit of Objects with Regard to Evaluation of Epizootic Situation in the Territory" of 9 December 2014 To be deposited 
Draft Decision of the EEC Council "On Amendments to the Regulation on 
Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and Sampling of Goods (Products), Subject to Vete rinary Control (Surveillance )", approved by Decision 
of the Customs Union Commission No. 834 of 18 October 2011"  WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
Draft Decision of the EEC Council "On Intr oduction of Amendmen ts to Decision of 
the CU Commission No. 810 'On Exception in Application of Veterinary Measures with regard to Goods Included into the Common List of Goods Subject to 
Veterinary Control (Surveillance)' of 23 September 2011"  WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Draft Decision of the EEC Collegium "On Amendments to the 'Common 
Veterinary (Veterinary and Sanitary) Requirements for Goods Subject to 
Veterinary Control (Surveillance)',  approved by the Decision of the CU Commission No. 317 of 18 June 2010" WT/ACC/KAZ/69/Add.1 
Draft Law "On Legal Protection of Selective Breeding Achievements"  WT/ACC/KAZ/20 
Draft Law "On Amendments and Addenda to the Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 193-IV 'On Public Health and Healthcare System' of 18 September 2009" WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Human Health Risk Assessment of Tetracycline Intake with Food WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.2 
Analysis of Phytosanitary Risk of Khap ra Beetle Trogoderma Granarium for the 
Territory of the Russian Federation of 2006 WT/ACC/KAZ/79 
Pest Risk Analysis of Four-Spotted Bean Weevil Callosobruchus Maculatus for the 
Territory of the Russian Federation of 2006 WT/ACC/KAZ/79 
 
- Trade-Related Investment Measures  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 18 "On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 "On Common Customs and Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 285 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Presidential Decree No. 2828 "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 
27 January 1996, which had the force of Law (repealed by Law No. 291-IV of 24 
June 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/4,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/69 
Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/69 
Governmental Resolution No. 134 "On Approval of Rules for Procurement of Goods, Works and Services in Performance of Subsu rface Use Operations" of 
14 February 2013 WT/ACC/KAZ/77/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 793 "On Approval of Rules of Determining the 
Country of Origin of Goods,  Execution, Confirmation and Issuance of Certificate 
on Origin of Goods and Repeal of Cert ain Decisions of the Government of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 2014  WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
Order of the Deputy Prime Minister - Mini ster of Industry and New Technologies 
No. 113 "On Certain Issues on Concluding, Conditions and Model Form of the Agreement on Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles with Legal Entities -
Residents of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 11 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
 
- Free Zones, Special Economic Areas  
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009  WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Presidential Decree No. 2823 "On Special Economic Zones" of 26 January 1996, 
which had the force of Law (repealed by Law No. 274 "On Special Economic 
Areas in the Republic of K azakhstan" of 6 July 2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/4,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.2,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Add.1 
Presidential Decree No. 2824 "On the Introduction of Amendments to Certain 
Laws and Decrees" of 26 January 1996, which had the force of Law (repealed by Law No. 274 "On Special Economic Areas in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 6 July 
2007) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 223-II "On Amendments and Addenda to Legal Normative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan On 'Astana – New City' Special Economic Zone" of 5 July 
2001 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Law No. 274-III "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 6 
July 2007 (repealed by Law No. 469-IV "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 21 July 2011) WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 355 "On Approv al of the List of Kazakhstani Goods 
Determined in accordance with Customs Legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Produced on the Territory of  Free Warehouse, and Sold to Other 
Part of the Customs Territory of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan, Sale Turnover of 
which is Exempted from VAT" of 14 April 2005 (repealed by Government 
Resolution No. 133 of 19 January 2012) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
 
- Government Procurement  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU/SES Agreement on State (Municipal) Procurement of 9 December 2010 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Law No. 303-III "On Government Procurement" of 21 July 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/72/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 586 "On Pu blic Procurement of Goods (Works, 
Services) in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 13 May 1996 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 141 of 25 February 1998) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1301 "On Approval of the Rules of Conducting 
Government Procurement" of 27 December 2007  WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
Government Resolution No. 623 "On Approval of the Rules of  Conducting 
Electronic Government Procurement" of 15 May 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
 
- Transit  
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009  WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
CU Agreement on the Specificity of Customs Transit of Goods, Transported by 
Railway on the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of 21 May 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No . 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 286 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
 
- Government-mandated Counter-trade and Barter  
Government Resolution No. 984 "On Proh ibition of Export and Import Barter 
Operations" of 17 July 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 483 of 27 May 1998) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
 
- Agricultural Policies  
CU/SES Agreement on Common Rules of  State Support of Agriculture of 9 
December 2010 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/69 
Law No. 66-III "On State Regulation of Agricultural and Industrial Complex and 
Rural Territories Development" of 8 July 2005 WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 1200 "On Introduction of Amendments to 
Government Resolution No. 984 'On Proh ibition of Export and Import Barter 
Operations'" of 29 August 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 483 of 27 May 1998) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 151 "On A pproval of Agriculture Development 
Programme for 2013-2020 'Agrobusiness 2020'" of 12 February 2013 To be deposited 
 
- Trade in Civil Aircraft  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 "On Common Customs and Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
 
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME  
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009  WT/ACC/KAZ/68  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU/SES Agreement on Common Principles  of Regulation in the Sphere of 
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights of 9 December 2010 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 5 September 1995  WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Issues in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Criminal Code No. 167-I of 16 July 1997 (Articles 184, 199 and 200) WT/ACC/KAZ/13 
Law No. 1422-XII "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 24 June 1992 
(repealed by Law No. 427-I of 16 July 1999) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 1888-XII "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of 
Goods" of 18 January 1993 (repealed by Law No. 457-I "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of 26 July 1999) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 6-I "On Copyright and Related Rights" of 10 June 1996 WT/ACC/KAZ/4, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/67/Add.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/77/Add.1,  WT/ACC/KAZ/84 
Law No. 427-I "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1  
Law No. 456-I "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods" of 26 July 1999 WT/ACC/KAZ/23,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Law No. 217-II "On Legal Protection of Layo ut Design of Integrated Microcircuits" 
of 29 June 2001 WT/ACC/KAZ/36/Add.1 
Law No. 586-II "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan On Intellectual Property" of 9 July 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Law No. 537-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Some Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property" of 12 January 2012 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Presidential Decree No. 806 "On National Patent Office" of 23 June 1992 
(repealed by Presidential Decree No. 1696 of 9 January 2006) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 287 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Government Resolution No. 508 "On th e Establishment of State Agency for 
Copyright and Related Rights" of 8 July 1992 (repealed by Presidential Decree 
No. 3377 of 4 March 1997) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Governmental Resolution No. 622 "On the National Patent Department Under the 
Cabinet of Ministers" of 21 July 1992 WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 889 "On the Procedure for Payment and Charge 
Rates for Patenting Inventions, Indu strial Samples and Utility Models, 
Registration of Trademarks and Service Marks, Registration and Acquisition of 
the Right for Using the Appellations of Origin of Goods" of 20 October 1992 (repealed by Resolution No. 1139 of 3 November 2004) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 949 "On the Approval of Procedure for Issuing the 
Protection Documents on Inventions, Industrial Samples, Trademarks and 
Service Marks" of 11 November 1992 WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 266 "On Proc edure of Payments and Charge Rates 
for Foreign Applicants for Legal Actions Co nnected with Protection of Industrial 
Property Objects within the Territory of Kazakhstan" of 6 April 1993 (repealed by Resolution No. 1139 of 3 November 2004) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 926 "On Rules of Public Demonstration of Cine-video 
Production" of 5 July 1995 (repealed by Resolution No. 1494 of 6 December 1494) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 297 "On Regulation for Consideration of Application 
for Trademark Registration" of 8 October 1997 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 1249 "On Concept of Protection of Intellectual 
Property Rights" of 26 September 2001 WT/ACC/KAZ/92 
Order of the Ministry of Finance No. 201 "On Rules on Keeping Register of 
Intellectual Property, Related Products, and Sharing Experience with Customs Bodies and Applicants" of 13 May 2003 (repealed by Order of the Ministry of Finance No. 356 of 16 July 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/66/Add.1 
Government Resolution No. 1102 "On the Draft Law of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan 'On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property'" of 28 October 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.2 
Order of the Patent Agency under the Ministry of Economy and Trade No. 296 
"On the Rules for Filing and Submission of Application for Registration of a 
Trademark" of 8 October 1996 (repealed by Order of the Ministry of Justice No. 55-OD of 24 April 2007)   WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Add.1 
Draft Patent Law  WT/ACC/KAZ/20 
Draft Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan Concerni ng Intellectual Property"  WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.1 
 
VI. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES 
 
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
CU/SES Agreement on Trade in Services and Investments of 9 December 2010 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/71/Add.1 
Law No. 2446-XII "On Auditing Activity" of 18 October 1993 (repealed by Law 
No. 304-I of 20 November 1998) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998  WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 567-II "On Communications" of 5 July 2004 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Law No. 214-III "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007 WT/ACC/KAZ/75/Add.1 
Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010 WT/ACC/KAZ/69 
Law No. 527-IV "On National Security" of 6 January 2012  WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Presidential Decree No. 2329 "On Medical Insurance of Citizens" of 15 June 
1995, which had the force of Law (repealed by Law No. 324-I of 12 December 1998) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Presidential Decree No. 2444 "On Banks and Banking Activity in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 31 August 1995, which has the force of Law WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Presidential Resolution No. 2445 "On the Measures for the Implementation of 
Presidential Decree 'On Banks and Banking Activity'" of 31 August 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Presidential Decree No. 2475 "On Insurance" of 3 October 1995, which had the 
force of Law (repealed by Law No. 127-II of 18 December 2000) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Presidential Decree No. 2697 "On the Utilization of Airspace and Activities of 
Aviation" of 20 December 1995, which had the force of Law (repealed by Law No. 339-IV of 15 July 2010) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 288 - 
 
  LEGISLATION /REGULATION  LEGISLATION NOTICE  
  
Government Resolution No. 1803 "On the Issues of the State Insurance 
Monitoring" of 19 December 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 851 
of 20 May 1997) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 478 "On the Ap proval of the Regulation on Licensing 
of Insurance Activities on the Territory of Kazakhstan" of 19 April 1996 (repealed 
by Government Resolution No. 709 of 24 May 2001) WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
Government Resolution No. 1064 "On Approval of Nomenclature of 
Telecommunication Services and Telecommunication Technologically Related Services with State-Regulated Prices" of 15 October 2004 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 155 of 14 March 2006) WT/ACC/KAZ/57/Add.3 
 
VII. TRANSPARENCY  
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 5 September 1995  WT/ACC/KAZ/4 
 VIII. TRADE AGREEMENTS  
Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Un ion of 29 May 2014 WT/ACC/KAZ/85,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/85/Rev.1 
Agreement between the Republic of Belaru s, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Russian Federation on the Customs Union of 20 January 1995  WT/ACC/KAZ/6 
Free Trade Agreement between the Govern ment of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
and the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic of 22 June 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/6 
Free Trade Agreement between the Govern ment of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
and the Government of the Republic of Moldova on of 26 May 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/6 
Treaty on the Establishment of the Common Customs Territory and the 
Formation of the Customs Union of 6 October 2007 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) WT/ACC/KAZ/68 
Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Government of the Russian Federation on  the Common Procedure for Regulating 
Foreign Economic Activities of 20 January 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/6 
Protocol "On Introduction of Free Tr ade Regime Without Exemptions and 
Restrictions Between the Re public of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 
20 January 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/6 
Protocol between the Government of  the Republic of Kazakhstan, the 
Government of the Kyrgyz Republic and the Government of Uzbekistan "On the 
Consideration of Issues of  Participation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the 
Customs Union between Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia" of 19 July 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/6 
Protocol between the Government of the Re public of Belarus, the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Gove rnment of the Russian Federation "On 
Completion of the First Stage of Enforcement of the Treaty on the Customs Union" of 22 November 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/6 
Resolution of the Intergovernmental Co mmission of Belarus,  Kazakhstan and the 
Russian Federation "On Terms of Formation of the Customs Union" of 22 November 1995 WT/ACC/KAZ/6 
Presidential Decree No. 2461 "On Ratification of the Agreement on the Customs 
Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation" of 15 September 1995, which has the force of Law WT/ACC/KAZ/6 
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 289 - 
 
  ANNEX 2 
List of Priority Activities, on the Level of th e Classifier of Sub-types of Activity, for which 
Investment Preferences Are Granted 
No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
01 Plant cultivation and 
livestock farming, hunting and provision of services in these fields 01.1 Growing of seasonal 
culture 01.11 Growing of cereals crops (except for 
rice), leguminous plants and oil seed  
01.12  Cultivation of rice 
01.13 Cultivation of vegetables and 
gourds, root crops and tuber crops 
01.14 Growing of sugarcane 
01.16 Growing of fibrillose fibre crops 
01.19 Growing of other seasonal culture, 
except for growing of flowers, production of flowers and cultivation of flowers seed 
01.2 Growing of perennial 
crops 01.21 Growing of grapes 
01.22 Cultivation of tropical and 
subtropical fruits 
01.23 Cultivation of citrus fruits 
01.24 Cultivation of large fruits  
01.25 Cultivation of other types of fruit 
tree  
01.26 Growing of oily fruits 
01.27 Growing of croppers for drinks 
production  
01.29 Growing of other perennial crops 
01.3 Manufacturing of farm 
production 01.30 Manufacturing of farm production 
01.4 Animal breeding  01.41 Breedin g of livestock dairy breed   
01.42 Breeding of other breeds of 
livestock and buffalos  
01.43 Breeding of horses and other hoofed 
breeds 
01.44 Breeding of camels and camelids 
01.45 Breeding of sheep and goats  
01.46 Breeding of pigs and piglet 
01.47 Poultry breeding 
01.49 Breeding of other types of animals 
01.6 Additional types of 
activities of growing of agricultural cultures  01.64 Processing and preparation of seeds 
for  breeding 
03 Fishery and 
aquaculture  03.2 Aquaculture 03.21 Marine aquaculture 
03.22 Fresh water aquaculture  
10.1 Processing and 
canning of meat and production of meat products 10.11 Processing and preservation of meat 
 
10.12 Processing and preservation of meat 
of poultry   
10.13 Production of products made by 
meat and meat of poultry   
10.2 Processing and 
preservation of fish, shellfish and scallops 10.20 Processing and preservation of fish, 
shellfish and scallops 
10.3 Processing and 
canning of fruit and vegetables 10.31 Processing and canning of potatoes 
 
10.32 Production of fruit and vegetable 
juices  
10.39 Processing and canning of fruit and 
vegetables, not included in other groups 
10.4 Production of fat and 
oil 10.41 Production of fat and oil 
10.42 Production of margarine and butter WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 290 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  10.5 Production of dairy 
products 10.51 Processing of milk and cheese 
production 
10.52 Ice-cream production 
10.6 Production of flour-
and-cereals industry 10.61 Production of flour-and-
cereals industry 
10.62 Production of starch and starch 
products  
10.7 Production of other 
products 10.71 Production of bread; production of 
fresh confectionery products, cakes 
and pastry 
10.72 Production of dried bread and 
cookies; production confectionery products, cakes, pastry and biscuits intended for long-term storage  
10.73 Production of macaroni foods 
10.81 Production of sugar 
10.83 Manufacture of tea and coffee 
10.84 Manufacture of spices and 
seasonings 
10.85 Manufacture of prepared food and 
in-process foods 
10.86 Manufacture of baby food and 
dietetic foodstuffs 
10.89 Manufacture of other foodstuffs not 
entered in other groups  
10.91 Manufacture of prepared foodstuff 
for animals that keeping in farms 
10.92 Manufacture of ready-made 
foodstuff for animals 
11.06 Manufacture of malt 
11.07 Manufacture of mineral water and 
other non-alcoholic beverages 
13 Manufacture of 
textile articles 13.1 Spinning, weaving 
and finishing industry 13.10 Spinning, weaving and finishing 
industry 
13.20 Manufacture textile articles 
13.2 Manufacture of textile 
fabric 13.30 Manufacture ready-made textile 
articles 
13.9 Manufacture of  other 
textile fabric 13.91 Manufacture of textile fabric 
13.92 Manufacture ready-made textile 
articles, except for clothes 
13.93 Manufacture of carpets and carpet 
articles 
13.94 Manufacture of cordage, ropes, 
binder and nets 
13.95 Manufacture of non-woven textile 
materials, except  for clothes  
13.96 Manufacture of  other engineering 
and manufacturing textile articles 
13.99 Manufacture of ot her textile articles 
not entered in other groups   
14 Manufacture of 
clothes,  14.1 Manufacture of 
clothes, except made from leather 14.11 Manufacture of clothes of leather  
14.12 Manufacture of working clothes 
14.13 Manufacture of outerwear  
14.14 Manufacture of underwear  
14.19 Manufacture of other clothes and 
accessories  
14.2 Manufacture of fur 
articles 14.20 Manufacture of fur articles 
14.3 Manufacture of 
knitted hosiery and 
other knitted goods 14.31 Manufacture of knitted hosiery 
goods 
14.39 Manufacture of other knitted goods 
15 Manufacture of 
leather, articles of leather  15.1 Hardening and 
currying of leather; manufacture paper 15.11 Hardening and currying of leather; 
dressing and dyeing of fur  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 291 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  15.12 Manufacture paper bags and ladies 
bags, harness articles  
15.2 Manufacture of 
footwear 15.20 Manufacture of footwear 
16 Manufacture of wood 
and cork articles, other  than furniture; manufacture articles made from straws and articles for platting    16.1 Manufacture wood-
sawing and joiner blade of articles for platting 16.10 Manufacture wood-sawing and 
joiner blade 
16.2 Manufacture of scale 
wood, plywood, slab and board  16.21 Manufacture of scale wood, 
plywood, slab and board 
16.22 Manufacture of ready-cut parquet 
coverage 
16.23 Manufacture of other wood building 
constructions and millwork  
17 Manufacture of pulp, 
paper, cardboard and 
articles of it 17.1 Manufacture of wood 
pulp and cellulose and 
cardboard 17.11 Manufacture of wood pulp and 
cellulose 
17.12 Manufacture of paper and cardboard 
17.2 Manufacture of 
articles of paper and cardboard 17.21 Manufacture of corrugated 
cardboard, paper and cardboard tare 
17.22 Manufacture of paper articles of 
household and sanitary-hygienic designation 
17.23 Manufacture of writing paper articles  
17.24 Manufacture of wallpaper 
17.29 Manufacture of other articles of 
paper and cardboard 
19 Manufacture of 
charred cool and products of  oil refining 19.1 Manufacture of 
products of coke oven 19.10 Manufacture of products of coke 
oven 
19.2 Manufacture of 
products of oil refining  19.20 Manufacture of products of oil 
refining  
20   Chemical industry 
 20.1 Manufacture of main 
chemicals, fertilisers and nitrogen compounds, plastics and synthetic caoutchouc in primary forms 20.11 Manufacture of industrial gas 
20.12 Manufacture of colours and 
pigments 
20.13  Manufacture of other general 
inorganic (chemical) matters 
20.14 Manufacture of other general 
organic (chemical) matters,  
20.15 Manufacture of fertilisers and 
nitrogen compounds 
20.16 Manufacture of plastics in primary 
forms 
20.17 Manufacture of synthetic caoutchouc 
in primary forms 
20.2 Manufacture of 
pesticides  and other agricultural chemical products 20.20 Manufacture of pe sticides  and other 
agricultural chemical products 
20.3 Manufacture of 
paints, lacquers and analogous coatings, typographic paints and mastics 20.30 Manufacture of paints, lacquers and 
analogous coatings, typographic paints and mastics 
20.4 Manufacture of soap 
and washing, cleansing and polishing matters, perfume and cosmetic matters 20.41 Manufacture of soap and washing, 
cleansing and polishing matters 
20.42 Manufacture of perfume and 
cosmetic matters 
20.5 Manufacture of 
chemical products 20.51 Manufacture of explosive materials 
20.52 Manufacture of glues  
20.53 Manufacture of essences WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 292 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  20.59 Manufacture of other chemical 
products not included in other categories 
20.6 Manufacture of 
artificial fibres 20.60 Manufacture of artificial fibres 
21 Manufacture of 
general pharmaceutical products 21.1 Manufacture of 
general pharmaceutical products 21.10 Manufacture of general 
pharmaceutical products 
21.2 21.20 Manufacture of pharmaceutical 
products 
22 Manufacture of 
rubber and plastic articles 22.1 Manufacture of 
rubber articles 22.11 Manufacture of rubber tires and 
automobile inner tube; retreading of rubber tires     
22.19 Manufacture of ot her rubber articles  
22.2 Manufacture of plastic 
articles 22.21 Manufacture of  plastic sheets, 
automobile inner tube and profile  
22.22 Manufacture of plastic packages for 
goods 
22.23 Manufacture of constructional plastic 
articles 
22.29 Manufacture of other plastic articles  
23 Manufacture of other 
non-metal mineral products 23.1 Manufacture of glass 
and other glass articles 23.11 Manufacture of plate glasses  
23.12 Forming and handling of plate 
glasses 
23.13 Manufacture of hollow glass articles  
23.14 Manufacture of glass fibre  
23.19 Manufacture and processing of other 
glass articles  
23.2 Manufacture of 
refractory products 23.20 Manufacture of refractory products 
23.3 Manufacture of 
building articles of 
burnt clay 23.31 Manufacture of building articles of 
clay 
23.32 Manufacture of bricks, tiles and 
other building articles of burnt clay 
23.4 Manufacture of other 
porcelain and ceramic articles 23.41 Manufacture of household and 
decorative ceramic articles  
23.42 Manufacture of ceramic 
sanitary-technical articles   
23.43 Manufacture of ceramic electric 
insulators and insulating accessories 
23.44 Manufacture of  other technical 
ceramic articles 
23.5 Manufacture of 
cement, linden and plaster 23.51 Manufacture of  cement including 
clinker 
23.52 Manufacture of gypsum articles for 
use in construction 
23.6 Manufacture of beton 
articles, cement and gypsum articles for use in construction 23.61 Manufacture of construction articles 
of concrete 
23.62 Manufacture of gypsum articles for 
construction purposes 
23.63 Manufacture of concrete ready for 
use  
23.64 Manufacture of dry concrete 
mixtures 
23.65 Manufacture of articles of asbestos 
cement and fibrous cement 
23.69 Manufacture of  other  concrete 
articles construction gypsum and cement 
23.7 Cutting, treatment 
and finishing of 
decoration of stone 23.70 Cutting, treatment and finishing of 
decoration of  stone WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 293 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  23.9 Manufacture of 
abrasive articles and other non-metal mineral products not entered in other groups 23.91 Manufacture of abrasive articles  
23.99 Manufacture of other non-metal 
mineral products not entered in other groups 
24 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles 24.1 Manufacture of iron, 
steel and ferrous alloys  24.10 Manufacture of iron, steel and 
ferrous alloys  
24.2 Manufacture of tubes, 
pipeline, section 
material, fittings made by steel 24.20 Manufacture of tubes, pipeline, 
section material, fittings made by steel 
24.3 Manufacture of other 
steel articles by primary operation 24.31 Manufacture of cold drawing 
24.32 Cold rolling of ribbons and ridges 
24.33 Cold moulding and folding 
24.34 Manufacture of wires made by cold 
extension  
24.4 Production of main 
precious metals and other ferrous metals 24.41 Production of precious metals  
24.42 Manufacture of aluminium  
24.43 Manufacture of lead, zinc and tin 
24.44 Manufacture of copper 
24.45 Manufacture of other ferrous metals 
24.46 Nuclear-fuel reprocessing 
24.5 Casting of metals 24.51  Casting of pig-iron  
24.52 Casting of steel 
24.53 Casting of light metals 
24.54 Casting of othe r non-ferrous metals 
25 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles, except for machinery and equipment 25.2 Manufacture of 
metallic cisterns, basin and containers 25.11 Manufacture of cisterns, basin and 
containers 
25.12 Manufacture of metallic doors and 
windows 
25.21 Manufacture of radiators and boilers 
for central heating 
25.29 Manufacture of metallic cisterns, 
basin and containers 
25.3 Manufacture of steam 
boilers 25.30 Manufacture of steam boilers 
25.4 Manufacture of 
weapons and ammunition 25.40 Manufacture of weapons and 
ammunition 
24.5 Hammering, pressing, 
stamping and shaping of metal sheet made by rolling manner  24.50 Hammering, pres sing, stamping and 
shaping of metal sheet made by rolling manner  
25.6  25.61 Metal working  and applying coat on 
metals 
25.62 Automatic development; processing 
and covering of metals  
25.7  25.71 Manufacture of other metallic 
articles 
25.72 Manufacture of key locks, loop and 
hinges 
25.73 Manufacture of instruments 
25.9  25.91 Manufacture of other metallic drums 
and similar container 
25.92 Manufacture of packing materials of 
light metals  
25.93 Manufacture of articles of wire 
25.94 Manufacture of fastening articles 
25.99 Manufacture of  other ready-made 
metal articles not included to this 
category WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 294 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
26 Manufacture of 
computers, electronic and optical products 26.1 Manufacture of 
electronic details 26.11 Manufacture of electronic details 
26.12 Manufacture of electronic panel 
feeds 
26.2 Manufacture of 
computers and off-line equipment  26.20 Manufacture of computers and 
off-line equipment  
26.3 Manufacture of 
communication equipment 26.30 Manufacture of communication 
equipment 
26.4 Manufacture electric 
appliances  26.40 Manufacture electric appliances for 
users 
26.5 Manufacture of 
instruments and equipment for measuring, testing and navigation; watches 26.51 Manufacture of instruments and 
equipment for measuring, testing and navigation 
26.6 Manufacture of 
illuminating, electro-medical and electrotherapy equipment 26.60 Manufacture of illuminating, 
electro-medical and electrotherapy equipment 
26.7 Manufacture of optical  
and photographic equipment 26.70 Manufacture of optical  and 
photographic equipment    
26.8 Manufacture of 
magnetic and optical transmission facility 26.80 Manufacture of magnetic and optical 
transmission facility    
27 Manufacture of 
electric equipment 27.1 Manufacture of 
electric motors, generators and transformers and electric distributing and controlling equipment 27.11 Manufacture of electric motors, 
generators and transformers 
27.12 Manufacture of electric distributing 
and controlling equipment 
27.2 Manufacture of 
radiators and accumulators 27.20 Manufacture of radiators and 
accumulators 
27.3 Manufacture of 
electric line and electric line articles 27.31 Manufacture of fibre-optic cable 
27.32 Manufacture of other types of 
electric line and cable  
27.33 Manufacture of electric appliances 
27.4 Manufacture of 
electric lighting equipment 27.40 Manufacture of electric lighting 
equipment 
27.5 Manufacture of  
household appliances 27.51 Manufacture of electric household 
appliances  
27.52 Manufacture of no electric 
household appliances 
27.9 Manufacture of  other 
electric equipment 27.90 Manufacture of other electric 
equipment  
28 Manufacture of 
machines and equipments, not included to other categories 28.1 Manufacture of 
engines of general use 28.11 Manufacture of engines and 
turbines, except for aviation, machinery and  motorcycle engines 
28.12 Manufacture of hydraulic equipment 
28.13 Manufacture of other pumps, 
compressors, thimbles and valves 
28.14 Manufacture of other valves and 
vents WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 295 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
    28.15 Manufacture of bearings, gears, 
elements of tooth gear and gear-drive 
28.2 Manufacture of other 
equipment of general use 28.21 Manufacture of slabs, stoves and 
kiln burner 
28.22 Manufacture of elevating and 
shipping equipment 
28.23 Manufacture of office equipment, 
office appliances (except for computers and peripheral equipment) 
28.24 Manufacture of manual electric tools 
28.25 Manufacture of industrial cooling 
and ventilating equipment 
28.29 Manufacture of other machines and 
general-purpose equipment, not 
included to other categories 
28.3 Manufacture of 
agricultural and forestry-based machines 28.30 Manufacture of agricultural and 
forestry-based machines 
28.4 Manufacture of metal 
fabrication machinery and metal machines 28.41 Manufacture of metal fabrication 
machinery  
28.49 Manufacture of other metal-working 
machine 
28.9 Manufacture of other 
machines and equipment of special purposes 28.91 Manufacture of machinery and 
equipment for metallurgy 
28.92 Manufacture of machinery for 
mining industry, underground operations and construction  
28.93 Manufacture of facilities for 
production, processing of foodstuff, beverages and tobacco 
28.94 Manufacture of fa cilities for textile, 
needle, fur and leather articles 
28.95 Manufacture of machines for paper 
and paperboard 
28.96 Manufacture of equipment for 
processing rubber, plastics and 
other polymeric materials 
28.99 Manufacture of other machines and 
equipment of special purposes, not included to other categories 
29 Manufacture of cars, 
trailers and semi-trailers 29.1 Manufacture of 
transportations 29.10 Manufacture of transportations 
29.2 Manufacture of bodies 
for transportations, trailers and semi-trailers 29.20 Manufacture of bodies for 
transportations, trailers and semi-trailers 
29.3 Manufacture of parts 
and equipment of transportations and their engines 29.31 Manufacture of electric and 
electronic equipment for transportations 
29.32 Manufacture of parts and materials 
for transportations and their engines  
30 Manufacture of other 
transportations 30.1 Building  marine ships 
and boats 30.11 Building of ships and floating 
structures 
30.12 Building of pleasure and sporting 
boats 
30.2 Manufacture of 
railway locomotives and rolling stocks 30.20 Manufacture of railway locomotives 
and rolling stocks 
30.3 Manufacture of air 
and space and etc. equipment 30.30 Manufacture of air and space and 
etc. equipment WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 296 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  30.4 Manufacture of 
military transportation facilities 30.40 Manufacture of military 
transportation facilities 
30.9 Manufacture of 
transportation facilities not included to other categories 30.91 Manufacture of motorcycles 
30.92 Manufacture of bicycle and invalid's 
wheel chair/armchairs 
31 Manufacture of 
furniture 31.1 Manufacture of 
furniture 31.01 Manufacture of office and studio 
furniture 
31.02 Manufacture of kitchen furniture 
31.03 Manufacture of mattress 
31.09 Manufacture of other furniture 
32 Manufacture of other 
ready-made articles 32.5 Manufacture of other 
ready-made articles 32.50 Manufacture of medical and dental 
facilities and articles 
33 Mending and 
assembling of machinery and equipment 33.1 Mending ready-made 
metallic materials and machinery and equipment-  33.11 Mending ready-made metallic 
materials 
33.12 Mending of machinery and 
equipment 
33.13 Mending of electronic and optical 
equipment 
33.14 Mending of electric equipment 
33.15 Mending, servicing of vessels and 
ships 
33.16 Mending, servicing of aerial vehicles 
and spacecrafts  
33.17 Mending, servicing of other types of 
transportation facilities 
33.19 Mending of other types of 
transportation facilities 
33.2  Assembling of 
industrial engineering and equipment 33.20 Assembling of in dustrial engineering 
and equipment 
35  Electricity and gas 
supply, air-conditioning  35.1 Production, supply of 
electrical energy 35.11 Production electrical energy 
35.12 Supply of el ectrical energy 
35.13 Distribution of electrical energy 
35.14 Sales of electrical energy to 
consumer 
35.2 Production and 
distribution of gaseous fuel 35.21 Production of gaseous fuel 
35.22 Distribution of gaseous fuel via 
pipelines 
35.23 Sales of gaseous fuel via pipelines 
35.3 System for delivering 
pair and conditioned air 35.30 System for delivering pair and 
conditioned air 
36 Collection, 
processing and distribution of water 36.0 Collection, processing 
and distribution of water 36.00 Collection, processing and 
distribution of water 
38 Collection, 
processing, elimination and recycling of wastes 38.1 Collection of 
hazardous wastes 38.12 Collection of hazardous wastes 
38.2 Processing and 
elimination of non-hazardous waste 38.21 Processing and elimination of 
non-hazardous waste 
38.3 Recycling of materials 38.32 Recycling of sorted materials 
42  Civil engineering 
 42.1 
 Construction of auto 
roads and railways roads  42.11 Construction of roads and highway 
42.12 Construction of railways and metro 
42.13 Construction of  bridges and tunnels 
42.2 Construction of 
engineering structures 42.21 Construction of distributive 
engineering project 
42.22 Construction of distributive 
engineering project for electric-light 
and telecommunication services WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 297 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
    42.91 Construction of water facilities 
42.99 Construction of other civil 
engineering projects, not entered in other groups 
49 Land transport and 
transportation by pipelines 49.1 Railway transport for 
passengers 49.10 Railway transport for passengers 
49.2 Railway transport for 
cargo-carrying 49.20 Railway transport for cargo-carrying 
49.3 Other ground 
transport for 
passengers 49.31 Urban and suburban ground 
passengers transport 
49.39 Other ground transport for 
passengers, not entered in other categories 
49.4 Freight traffic by 
highway transportation and 
services for pickup of 
wastes 49.41 Freight traffic by highway 
transportation 
49.5 Transportation by 
pipelines 49.50 Transportati on by pipelines 
50 Water transport  50.1 Marine and riverside 
passenger's transport 50.10 Marine and riverside passenger's 
transport 
50.2 Marine and riverside 
cargo's transport 50.20 Marine and riverside cargo's 
transport 
50.3 River transport for 
passengers 50.30 River transport for passengers 
50.4 River transport for 
cargo  50.40 River transport for cargo  
51 
 Air transport  51.1 Air passenger 
transport 51.10 Air passenger transport 
51.2 Air cargo transport 
and transport of 
space system 51.21 Air cargo transport 
51.22 Transport of space system 
52 Warehousing and 
auxiliary and additional transport activity   52.1 Warehousing and 
storage of cargo 52.10 Warehousing and storage of cargo 
52.2 Other ancillary 
activities in transportation  52.21 Services in the area of land 
transport 
52.22 Services rendered in a water 
transport 
52.23 Services rendered in air transport 
52.24 Handling services  
55 Rendering of services 
by hotels 55.1 Rendering of services 
by hotels 55.10 Rendering of services by hotels 
55.10 Rendering of services by hotels 
55.3 Tourist camps, parks 
and entertainments 55.30 Tourist camps, parks and 
entertainments 
61  Telecommunication 61.2 Wireless 
communications 61.20 Wireless communications 
61.3 Activities in the 
sphere of satellite telecommunications 61.30 Activities in the sphere of satellite 
telecommunications 
68 Real estate 
operations 68.1 Renting and using of 
personal or rental real estate 68.20 Renting and usin g of personal or 
rental real estate WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 298 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
85  Education 
 85.1 Preschool education 85.10 Preschool education 
85.2 Primary education  
(first level) 85.20 Primary education  
(first level) 
85.3 Fundamental and 
general secondary level education (second and third levels) 85.31 Fundamental and general secondary 
level education  
85.32 Technical and professional 
secondary level education 
85.4 Higher education 85.41 After secondary-level education 
85.42 Higher education 
86 Activity in the field of 
health care 86.1 Activity of medical 
institutions 86.10 Activity of medical institutions 
93 Activity for 
organization of leisure and entertainment, 
culture and sport 93.1 Sport activities 93.11 Activity of sporting institutions 
93.2 Other types of 
activities for organization of leisure and entertainment 93.29 Other types of activities for 
organization of leisure and entertainment 
Note: Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 is not applied for customs duties exemptions for 
spare parts of the technological equipment, raw materials and inputs. 
Customs duties exemptions for spar e parts of the technological equipm ent, raw materials and inputs are 
granted for the list of priority activities, on the level of the classifier of sub-types of activities, for which 
customs duties exemptions for imported spare parts of the technological equipment,  raw materials and inputs 
are granted, approved by the Government  Resolution No. 416 of 8 August 2012.  
Source: Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 as amended by Government Resolution No. 809 of 
6 August 2010.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 299 - 
 
  SUPPLEMENT TO ANNEX 2 
List of Priority Activities, on the Level of th e Classifier of Sub-types of Activity, for which 
Customs Duties Exemptions for Imported Sp are Parts of the Technological equipment, 
raw Materials and Inputs Are Granted 
No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
01 Plant cultivation 
and livestock farming, hunting and provision of services in these fields 01.1 Growing of 
seasonal culture 01.11 Growing of cereals crops (except for rice), 
leguminous plants and oil seed  
01.12  Cultivation of rice 
01.13 Cultivation of vegeta bles and gourds, root 
crops and tuber crops 
01.14 Growing of sugarcane 
01.16 Growing of fibrillose fibre crops 
01.19 Growing of other season al culture, except for 
growing of flowers, production of flowers and cultivation of flowers seed 
01.2 Growing of 
perennial crops 01.21 Growing of grapes 
01.22 Cultivation of tropical and subtropical fruits 
01.23 Cultivation of citrus fruits 
01.24 Cultivation of large fruits  
01.25 Cultivation of other types of fruit tree  
01.26 Growing of oily fruits 
01.27 Growing of croppers for drinks production  
01.29 Growing of other perennial crops 
01.3 Manufacturing of 
farm production 01.30 Manufacturing of farm production 
01.4 Animal breeding  01.41 Breeding of livestock dairy breed   
01.42 Breeding of other breeds of livestock and 
buffalos  
01.43 Breeding of horses and other hoofed breeds 
01.44 Breeding of camels and camelids 
01.45 Breeding of sheep and goats  
01.46 Breeding of pigs and piglet 
01.47 Poultry breeding 
01.49 Breeding of other types of animals 
01.6 Additional types 
of activities of growing of agricultural cultures  01.64 Processing and preparation of seeds for  
breeding 
03 Fishery and 
aquaculture  03.2 Aquaculture 03.21 Marine aquaculture 
03.22 Fresh water aquaculture  
10.1 Processing and 
canning of meat and production of meat products 10.11 Processing and preservation of meat  
10.12 Processing and preservation of meat of 
poultry   
10.13 Production of products made by meat and 
meat of poultry   
10.2 Processing and 
preservation of 
fish, shellfish and 
scallops 10.20 Processing and preservation of fish, shellfish 
and scallops 
10.3 Processing and 
canning of fruit and vegetables 10.31 Processing and canning of potatoes 
10.32 Production of fruit and vegetable juices  
10.39 Processing and canning of fruit and 
vegetables, not included in other groups 
10.4 Production of fat 
and oil 10.41 Production of fat and oil 
10.42 Production of margarine and butter 
 
10.5 Production of 
dairy products 10.51 Processing of milk and cheese production 
10.52 Ice-cream production 
10.6 Production of 
flour-and-cereals industry 10.61 Production of flou r-and-cereals industry 
10.62 Production of starch and starch products  
10.7 Production of 
other products 10.71 Production of bread; production of fresh 
confectionery products, cakes and pastry WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 300 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
10.72 Production of dried bread and cookies; 
production confectionery products, cakes, pastry and biscuits intended for long-term storage  
10.73 Production of macaroni foods 
10.81 Production of sugar 
10.83 Manufacture of tea and coffee 
10.84 Manufacture of spices and seasonings 
10.85 Manufacture of prepared food and in-process 
foods 
10.86 Manufacture of baby food and dietetic 
foodstuffs 
10.89 Manufacture of other foodstuffs not entered 
in other groups  
10.91 Manufacture of prepared foodstuff for 
animals that keeping in farms 
10.92 Manufacture of read y-made foodstuff for 
animals 
11.06 Manufacture of malt 
11.07 Manufacture of mi neral water and other 
non-alcoholic beverages 
13 Manufacture of 
textile articles 13.1 Spinning, 
weaving and finishing industry 13.10 Spinning, weaving and finishing industry 
13.20 Manufacture textile articles 
13.2 Manufacture of 
textile fabric 13.30 Manufacture ready-made textile articles 
13.9 Manufacture of  
other textile fabric 13.91 Manufacture of textile fabric 
13.92 Manufacture ready-made textile articles, 
except for clothes 
13.93 Manufacture of carpets and carpet articles 
13.94 Manufacture of cordage, ropes, binder and 
nets 
13.95 Manufacture of non-wo ven textile materials, 
except for clothes  
13.96 Manufacture of other engineering and 
manufacturing textile articles 
13.99 Manufacture of othe r textile articles not 
entered in other groups  
14 Manufacture of 
clothes,  14.1 Manufacture of 
clothes, except 
made from 
leather 14.11 Manufacture of clothes of leather  
14.12 Manufacture of working clothes 
14.13 Manufacture of outerwear  
14.14 Manufacture of underwear  
14.19 Manufacture of other clothes and accessories  
14.2 Manufacture of 
fur articles 14.20 Manufacture of fur articles 
14.3 Manufacture of 
knitted hosiery and other knitted goods 14.31 Manufacture of knitted hosiery goods 
14.39 Manufacture of other knitted goods 
15 Manufacture of 
leather, articles of leather  15.1 Hardening and 
currying of leather; manufacture paper bags and ladies bags, 
harness articles; 
dressing and dyeing of fur 15.11 Hardening and currying of leather; dressing 
and dyeing of fur  
15.12 Manufacture paper bags and ladies bags, 
harness articles  
15.2 Manufacture of 
footwear 15.20 Manufacture of footwear 
16 Manufacture of 
wood and cork 
articles, other  
than furniture; manufacture 16.1 Manufacture 
wood-sawing and 
joiner blade of 
articles for platting 16.10 Manufacture wood-sawing and joiner blade WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 301 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
16.2 Manufacture of 
scale wood, plywood, slab and board  16.21 Manufacture of scale wood, plywood, slab 
and board 
16.22 Manufacture of ready-cut parquet coverage 
16.23 Manufacture of other wood building 
constructions and millwork  
17 Manufacture of 
pulp, paper, cardboard and articles of it 17.1 Manufacture of 
wood pulp and cellulose and cardboard 17.11 Manufacture of wood  pulp and cellulose 
17.12 Manufacture of paper and cardboard 
17.2 Manufacture of 
articles of paper 
and cardboard 17.21 Manufacture of corrugated cardboard, paper 
and cardboard tare 
17.22 Manufacture of paper articles of household 
and sanitary-hygienic designation 
17.23 Manufacture of writing paper articles 
17.24 Manufacture of wallpaper 
17.29 Manufacture of other articles of paper and 
cardboard 
19 Manufacture of 
charred cool and products of oil refining 19.1 Manufacture of 
products of coke oven 19.10 Manufacture of products of coke oven 
19.2 Manufacture of 
products of oil refining  19.20 Manufacture of produc ts of oil refining  
20 
 
 Chemical 
industry 
 20.1 Manufacture of 
main chemicals, 
fertilisers and 
nitrogen compounds, plastics and synthetic caoutchouc in primary forms 20.11 Manufacture of industrial gas 
20.12 Manufacture of colours and pigments 
20.13 
 Manufacture of other general inorganic 
(chemical) matters 
20.14 Manufacture of other general organic 
(chemical) matters,  
20.15 Manufacture of fertilisers and nitrogen 
compounds 
20.16 Manufacture of plastics in primary forms 
20.17 Manufacture of synthetic caoutchouc in 
primary forms 
20.2 Manufacture of 
pesticides  and other agricultural chemical products 20.20 Manufacture of pe sticides  and other 
agricultural chemical products  
  20.3 Manufacture of 
paints, lacquers and analogous coatings, typographic paints and mastics 20.30 Manufacture of paints, lacquers and 
analogous coatings, typographic paints and mastics 
20.4 Manufacture of 
soap and 
washing, cleansing and polishing matters, perfume and cosmetic matters 20.41 Manufacture of soap and washing, cleansing 
and polishing matters 
20.42 Manufacture of pe rfume and cosmetic 
matters 
20.5 Manufacture of 
chemical products 20.51 Manufacture of explosive materials 
20.52 Manufacture of glues  
20.53 Manufacture of essences 
20.59 Manufacture of other chemical products not 
included in other categories 
20.6 Manufacture of 
artificial fibres 20.60 Manufacture of artificial fibres 
21 Manufacture of 
general pharmaceutical products 21.1 Manufacture of 
general pharmaceutical products 21.10 Manufacture of general pharmaceutical 
products 
21.2 21.20 Manufacture of pharmaceutical products WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 302 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
22 Manufacture of 
rubber and plastic articles 22.1 Manufacture of 
rubber articles 22.11 Manufacture of rubber tires and automobile 
inner tube; retreading of rubber tires  
22.19 Manufacture of othe r rubber articles  
22.2 Manufacture of 
plastic articles 22.21 Manufacture of plastic sheets, automobile 
inner tube and profile  
22.22 Manufacture of plastic packages for goods 
22.23 Manufacture of constructional plastic articles 
22.29 Manufacture of other plastic articles  
23 Manufacture of 
other non-metal mineral products 23.1 Manufacture of 
glass and other glass articles 23.11 Manufacture of plate glasses  
23.12 Forming and handli ng of plate glasses 
23.13 Manufacture of hollow glass articles  
23.14 Manufacture of glass fibre  
23.19 Manufacture and processing of other glass 
articles  
23.2 Manufacture of 
refractory products 23.20 Manufacture of refractory products 
23.3 Manufacture of 
building articles of burnt clay 23.31 Manufacture of building articles of clay 
23.32 Manufacture of bricks, tiles and other 
building articles  of burnt clay 
23.4 Manufacture of 
other porcelain and ceramic articles 23.41 Manufacture of household and decorative 
ceramic articles  
23.42 Manufacture of cera mic sanitary-technical 
articles  
23.43 Manufacture of ceramic electric insulators 
and insulating accessories 
23.44 Manufacture of ot her technical ceramic 
articles 
23.5 Manufacture of 
cement, linden and plaster 23.51 Manufacture of cement including clinker 
23.52 Manufacture of gypsum articles for use in 
construction 
23.62 Manufacture of gypsum articles for 
construction purposes 
23.63 Manufacture of concrete ready for use  
23.64 Manufacture of dry concrete mixtures 
23.65 Manufacture of articl es of asbestos cement 
and fibrous cement 
23.69 Manufacture of othe r  concrete articles 
construction gypsum and cement 
23.7 Cutting, 
treatment and finishing of decoration of  stone 23.70 Cutting, treatment and finishing of 
decoration of stone 
23.9 Manufacture of 
abrasive articles and other non-
metal mineral 
products not entered in other groups 23.91 Manufacture of abrasive articles  
23.99 Manufacture of other non-metal mineral 
products not entered in other groups 
24 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles 24.1 Manufacture of 
iron, steel and ferrous alloys  24.10 Manufacture of iron, st eel and ferrous alloys  
24.2 Manufacture of 
tubes, pipeline, 
section material, fittings made by steel 24.20 Manufacture of tubes, pipeline, section 
material, fittings made by steel 
24.3 Manufacture of 
other steel articles by primary operation 24.31 Manufacture of cold drawing 
24.32 Cold rolling of ribbons and ridges 
24.33 Cold moulding and folding 
24.34 Manufacture of wires made by cold extension  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 303 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  24.4 Production of 
main precious metals and other ferrous metals 24.41 Production of precious metals  
24.42 Manufacture of aluminium  
24.43 Manufacture of lead, zinc and tin 
24.44 Manufacture of copper 
24.45 Manufacture of ot her ferrous metals 
24.46 Nuclear-fuel reprocessing 
24.5 Casting of metals 24.51 Casting of pig-iron  
24.52 Casting of steel 
24.53 Casting of light metals 
24.54 Casting of other non-ferrous metals 
25 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles, except for machinery and equipment 25.2 Manufacture of 
metallic cisterns, basin and containers 25.11 Manufacture of cisterns, basin and containers
 
25.12 Manufacture of metallic doors and windows 
25.21 Manufacture of radiators and boilers for 
central heating 
25.29 Manufacture of metallic cisterns, basin and 
containers 
25.3 Manufacture of 
steam boilers 25.30 Manufacture of steam boilers 
25.4 Manufacture of 
weapons and ammunition 25.40 Manufacture of weapons and ammunition 
  24.5 Hammering, 
pressing, stamping and shaping of metal sheet made by rolling manner  24.50 Hammering, pressing , stamping and shaping 
of metal sheet made by rolling manner  
25.6  25.61 Metal working and applying coat on metals 
25.62 Automatic development; processing and 
covering of metals  
25.7  25.71 Manufacture of other metallic articles 
25.72 Manufacture of key locks, loop and hinges 
25.73 Manufacture of instruments 
25.9  25.91 Manufacture of other metallic drums and 
similar container 
25.92 Manufacture of packing materials of light 
metals  
25.93 Manufacture of articles of wire 
25.94 Manufacture of fastening articles 
25.99 Manufacture of ot her ready-made metal 
articles not included to this category 
26 Manufacture of 
computers, electronic and optical products 26.1 Manufacture of 
electronic details 26.11 Manufacture of electronic details 
26.12 Manufacture of el ectronic panel feeds 
26.2 Manufacture of 
computers and off-line equipment  26.20 Manufacture of computers and off-line 
equipment  
26.3 Manufacture of 
communication equipment 26.30 Manufacture of communication equipment 
26.4 Manufacture 
electric appliances  26.40 Manufacture electric appliances for users 
26.5 Manufacture of 
instruments and equipment for measuring, testing and navigation; watches 26.51 Manufacture of instruments and equipment 
for measuring, testing and navigation 
26.6 Manufacture of 
illuminating, 
electro-medical 
and electrotherapy equipment 26.60 Manufacture of illumi nating, electro-medical 
and electrotherapy equipment WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 304 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
26.7 Manufacture of 
optical  and photographic equipment 26.70 Manufacture of optical  and photographic 
equipment 
26.8 Manufacture of 
magnetic and optical transmission facility 26.80 Manufacture of magnetic and optical 
transmission facility 
27 Manufacture of 
electric equipment 27.1 Manufacture of 
electric motors, generators and transformers and electric distributing and controlling equipment 27.11 Manufacture of electric motors, generators 
and transformers 
27.12 Manufacture of electric distributing and 
controlling equipment 
27.2 Manufacture of 
radiators and accumulators 27.20 Manufacture of radiators and accumulators 
27.3 Manufacture of 
electric line and electric line articles 27.31 Manufacture of fibre-optic cable 
27.32 Manufacture of other types of electric line 
and cable  
27.33 Manufacture of electric appliances 
27.4 Manufacture of 
electric lighting equipment 27.40 Manufacture of electric lighting equipment 
27.5 Manufacture of  
household appliances 27.51 Manufacture of electric household appliances 
 
27.52 Manufacture of no electric household 
appliances 
27.9 Manufacture of  
other electric 
equipment 27.90 Manufacture of other electric equipment  
28 Manufacture of 
machines and equipments, not included to other categories 28.1 Manufacture of 
engines of general use 28.11 Manufacture of engines and turbines, except 
for aviation, machinery and  motorcycle engines 
28.12 Manufacture of hydraulic equipment 
28.13 Manufacture of other pumps, compressors, 
thimbles and valves 
28.14 Manufacture of ot her valves and vents 
28.15 Manufacture of bearings, gears, elements of 
tooth gear and gear-drive 
28.2 Manufacture of 
other equipments of general use 28.21 Manufacture of slabs, stoves and kiln burner 
28.22 Manufacture of elevating and shipping 
equipment 
28.23 Manufacture of office equipment, office 
appliances (except for computers and peripheral equipment) 
28.24 Manufacture of manual electric tools 
28.25 Manufacture of industrial cooling and 
ventilating equipment 
28.29 Manufacture of othe r machines and general-
purpose equipment, not included to other categories 
28.3 Manufacture of 
agricultural and 
forestry-based machines 28.30 Manufacture of agricultural and forestry-
based machines 
28.4 Manufacture of 
metal fabrication machinery and metal machines 28.41 Manufacture of metal fabrication machinery  
28.49 Manufacture of other metal-working machine WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 305 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  28.9 Manufacture of 
other machines and equipment of special purposes 28.91 Manufacture of machinery and equipment for 
metallurgy 
28.92 Manufacture of machinery for mining 
industry, underground operations and construction  
28.93 Manufacture of facilities for production, 
processing of foodstuff, beverages and tobacco  
28.94 Manufacture of facilit ies for textile, needle, 
fur and leather articles 
28.95 Manufacture of machines for paper and 
paperboard 
28.96 Manufacture of equipment for processing 
rubber, plastics and other polymeric materials  
28.99 Manufacture of other machines and 
equipment of special purposes, not included to other categories 
29 Manufacture of 
cars, trailers and semi-trailers 29.1 Manufacture of 
transportations 29.10 Manufacture of transportations 
29.2 Manufacture of 
bodies for transportations, 
trailers and 
semi-trailers 29.20 Manufacture of bodies for transportations, 
trailers and semi-trailers 
29.3 Manufacture of 
parts and equipments of transportations and their engines 29.31 Manufacture of electric and electronic 
equipment for transportations 
29.32 Manufacture of parts and materials for 
transportations and their engines  
30 Manufacture of 
other transportations 30.1 Building  marine 
ships and boats 30.11 Building of ships and floating structures 
30.12 Building of pleasure and sporting boats 
30.2 Manufacture of 
railway locomotives and rolling stocks 30.20 Manufacture of railway locomotives and 
rolling stocks 
30.3 Manufacture of 
air and space and etc. equipment 30.30 Manufacture of air and space and etc. 
equipment 
30.4 Manufacture of 
military transportation facilities 30.40 Manufacture of military transportation 
facilities 
30.9 Manufacture of 
transportation facilities not included to other categories 30.91 Manufacture of motorcycles 
30.92 Manufacture of bicycle and invalid's wheel 
chair/armchairs 
31 Manufacture of 
furniture 31.1 Manufacture of 
furniture 31.01 Manufacture of office and studio furniture 
31.02 Manufacture of kitchen furniture 
31.03 Manufacture of mattress 
31.09 Manufacture of  other furniture 
32 Manufacture of 
other ready-made articles 32.5 Manufacture of 
other ready-made articles 32.50 Manufacture of medica l and dental facilities 
and articles 
33 Mending and 
assembling of machinery and equipment 33.1 Mending ready-
made metallic materials and machinery and equipment   33.11 Mending ready-made metallic materials 
33.12 Mending of machinery and equipment 
33.13 Mending of electronic and optical equipment 
33.14 Mending of electric equipment 
33.15 Mending, servicing of vessels and ships 
33.16 Mending, servicing of aerial vehicles and 
spacecrafts  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 306 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
   33.17 Mending, servicing of other types of 
transportation facilities 
33.19 Mending of other types of transportation 
facilities 
  33.2 Assembling of 
industrial engineering and equipment 33.20 Assembling of indu strial engineering and 
equipment 
35  Electricity and 
gas supply, air-conditioning  35.1 Production, 
supply of electrical energy 35.11 Production electrical energy 
35.12 Supply of electrical energy 
35.13 Distribution of electrical energy 
35.14 Sales of electrical energy to consumer 
35.2 Production and 
distribution of gaseous fuel 35.21 Production of gaseous fuel 
35.22 Distribution of gase ous fuel via pipelines 
35.23 Sales of gaseous fuel via pipelines 
35.3 System for 
delivering pair and conditioned air 35.30 System for delivering  pair and conditioned 
air 
36 Collection, 
processing and distribution of water 36.0 Collection, 
processing and distribution of water 36.00 Collection, processing  and distribution of 
water 
38 Collection, 
processing, elimination and recycling of wastes 38.1 Collection of 
hazardous wastes 38.12 Collection of hazardous wastes 
38.2 Processing and 
elimination of non-hazardous waste 38.21 Processing an d elimination of non-hazardous 
waste 
38.3 Recycling of 
materials 38.32 Recycling of sorted materials 
42 
 Civil engineering 
 42.1 
 Construction of 
auto roads and railways roads  42.11 Construction of roads and highway 
42.12 Construction of railways and metro 
42.13 Construction of bridges and tunnels 
42.2 Construction of 
engineering structures 42.21 Construction of di stributive engineering 
project 
42.22 Construction of di stributive engineering 
project for electric-light and telecommunication services 
42.91 Construction of water facilities 
42.99 Construction of other civil engineering 
projects, not entered in other groups 
49 Land transport 
and transportation by pipelines 49.1 Railway transport 
for passengers 49.10 Railway transport for passengers 
49.2 Railway transport 
for cargo-carrying 49.20 Railway transport for cargo-carrying 
49.3 Other ground 
transport for passengers 49.31 Urban and suburban ground passengers 
transport 
49.39 Other ground transport for passengers, not 
entered in other categories 
49.4 Freight traffic by 
highway transportation and services for pick up of wastes 49.41 Freight traffic by highway transportation 
49.5 Transportation by 
pipelines 49.50 Transportation by pipelines WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 307 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
50 Water transport  50.1 Marine and 
riverside passenger's transport 50.10 Marine and riverside passenger's transport 
50.2 Marine and 
riverside cargo's transport 50.20 Marine and riverside cargo's transport 
50.3 River transport 
for passengers 50.30 River transport for passengers 
50.4 River transport 
for cargo  50.40 River transport for cargo  
51 
 Air transport  51.1 Air passenger 
transport 51.10 Air passenger transport 
51.2 Air cargo 
transport and transport of space system 51.21 Air cargo transport 
51.22 Transport of space system 
52 Warehousing 
and auxiliary and additional transport activity   52.1 Warehousing and 
storage of cargo 52.10 Warehousing and storage of cargo 
52.2 Other ancillary 
activities in transportation  52.21 Services in the area of land transport 
52.22 Services rendered in a water transport 
52.23 Services rendered in air transport 
52.24 Handling services  
Source: Government Resolution No. 1416 of 8 August 2012. 
 
  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 308 - ANNEX 3(A) 
Progress in Privatization of State Property in 1991-2012  
(in entities ) 
Year 1991-1992  1993 1994 1995 1996  1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004  2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 
Number of 
privatized entities 
of State ownership 4,771  154 2,646 3,630 4,442  7,004  3,240  2,624  1,859  2,205  1,823  2,106 2,094  1,239  654 945 846 1,241  651 658 799 
Privatized State 
shares in JSCs and 
LLPs - - - 385 889  1,315  513 162 93 146 67 65 58  16 1 - - 3 3 1 5 
Privatized 
individual projects - 1 1 6 27  48 11 - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - 
Privatized property 
complexes, immovable 
property objects, 
incomplete construction, transportation and other objects 4,771
 153 2,645 3,239 3,526  5,641  2,716  2,462  1,766  2,059  1,756  2,041 2,036  1,223  653 945 846 1,238  648 657 794 
Source:  Adapted from the data provided by the  State Property and Priv atization Committee, Mi nistry of Finance. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 309 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(B) 
Progress in Privatization of State Property in 2000-2012 
(in entities) 
Area of activity 2000-2012 
1. Privatized State shares in  JSCs and LLPs, total  458  
Including:  
- Industry 136 
- Construction 26 
- Agriculture 50 
- Transportation and communication 54 
- Trade in and repair of household goods 28  
- Finance 8 
- Health care 27 
- Education 15 
- Other objects 114 
2. Privatized property complexes, immovable property objects, 
incomplete construction, transportation and other objects  16,662  
Total 17,120  
Source: Adapted from the data provided by the State Property and Privatization Committee, Ministry of 
Finance.  
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 310 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(C) 
The Number of State Enterprises by Type of Economic Activity in 2009-2013 
Type of economic activity 01.01.2009 01.01.2010 01.01.2011 01.01.2012 01.01.2013 
 RSEs* CSEs** RSEs CSEs RSEs CSEs RSEs CSEs RSEs CSEs 
Total 707 5,808 719 6,098 636 6218 584 6,376 479 6,348  
Agriculture, forestry and 
fishing 49 96 49 101 35 80 21 74 20 74  
Mining and quarrying 2 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0  
Manufacturing 24 44 23 41 21 36 19 37 19 28  
Electricity, gas, steam 
and air conditioning supply 7 137 7 135 7 136 6 135 6 124
 
Water supply, sewerage, 
waste management and remediation activities 18 322 18 330 16 328 8 324 6 283
 
Construction 34 83 32 88 26 88 21 78 21 63  
Wholesale and retail 
trade; repair of motor 
vehicles and motorcycles 30 66 29 64 23 55 22 48 18 43  
Transportation and 
storage 38 52 39 52 30 55 26 57 23 46  
Accommodation and food 
service activities 9 18 8 19 7 21 6 22 6 22  
Information and 
communication 43 205 44 209 41 190 39 183 21 62  
Financial and insurance 
activities 4 8 8 16 3 8 3 8 3 7  
Real estate activities 37 81 36 82 34 74 33 67 28 50  
Administrative and 
support service activities 9 200 8 194 8 164 8 160 7 132  
Public administration and 
defence, compulsory social security 30 65 29 74 17 52 15 44 13 38
 
Education 75 2,255 79 2,401 78 2,768 75 3,005 72 3,184  
Human health and social 
work activities 39 1,181 44 1,320 39 1,187 41 1,120 37 1,054  
Arts, entertainment and 
recreation 44 752 44 773 42 781 42 807 42 815  
Other service activities 2 22 2 22 1 19 0 19 0 15  
* RSEs - Republican State Ente rprises, property of which is  in republican ownership. 
** CSEs – Communal State Enterprises, proper ty of which is in municipal ownership. 
Data is classified in accordance with the State General Classifier of Types of Economic Activity 03-2007.  Source: Statistics Agency.  
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 311 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(D) 
The Number of Joint Stock Companies with State Participation by Type of Economic 
Activity in 2008-2013 
Types of economic 
activity 01.01.2008 01.01.2009 01.01.2010 01.01.2011 01.01.2012 01.01.2013  
Total 468 457 379 370   367 364 
Agriculture, forestry 
and fishing 25 22 19 15   15 14 
Mining and quarrying 2 2 1 2 2 2 
Manufacturing 62 59 43 42   37 32 
Electricity, gas, steam 
and air conditioning supply 33 31 28 25   24 20 
Water supply, 
sewerage, waste management and remediation activities 11 11 10 12   11 9 
Construction 38 37 28 28   27 28 
Wholesale and retail 
trade; repair of motor vehicles and 
motorcycles 46 42 31 23   21 18 
Transportation and 
storage 66 63 52 45   37 36 
Accommodation and 
food service activities 4 4 2 1   1 2 
Information and 
communication 23 23 18 18   19 23 
Financial and 
insurance activities 37 40 33 33   35 35 
Real estate activities 14 14 13 16   17 16 
Professional, scientific 
and technical activities 51 51 49 51   54 62 
Administrative and 
support service activities 9 9 11 11   15 15 
Public administration 
and defence, compulsory social security 1 1 1 1 2 3 
Education 18 19 17 18   20 19 
Human health and 
social work activities 15 16 11 13   14 14 
Arts, entertainment 
and recreation 9 9 10 13   13 13 
Other service activities 4 4 2 3   3 3 
Data is classified in accordance with the State General Classifier of Types of Economic Activity 03-2007.  
Source: Statistics Agency.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 312 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(E) 
The Allotment of State Share Holding in Joint Stock Companies 
Share of State 
participation Number of Joint Stock Companies 
01.01.2008* 01.01.2009 01.01.2010** 01.01.2011 01.01.2012 01.01.2013 
100% 94 94 212  223  230   236  
50% to 100% 17 14 64  75  71   67  
25% to 50% 13 14 23  29  25   22  
less than 25% 7 7 80  43  41   39  
Total 131 129 379  370  367   364  
Source: * Data for 2008 and 2009 is adapted from the data provided by the State Property and Privatization 
Committee, Minist ry of Finance. 
 ** Data for 2010 – 2013 is provided by the Statistics Agency. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 313 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(F) 
The List of Spheres where State Enterprises could be Established 
1. Public utility services for population (ene rgy, gas, water, heating supply and burial of 
communal wastes, creation and maintenance of waste landfills); 
2. Creation of woodland park, green and protection zones with the restricted regime of nature 
use and forest planting; 
3. Activities maintaining the functions of the Na tional Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the 
Administration of the President of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and its departments and 
diplomatic service authorities of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
4. Maintenance of State-owned automobile roads; 5. Public healthcare, public higher and post-graduate education; 
6. Operation of public sports and fitn ess entities, culture and leisure parks; 
7. Scientific researches;  8. Maintenance of the State land cadastre, information databases concerning subsurface and 
subsurface use, State reserves of ecological information and State cadastres of natural 
resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan, state register of regulatory legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
9. Maintenance, operation, and safety of water management systems, and facilities which 
were in State ownership; 
10. Plant protection and quarantine, and phytosan itary expertise of production subject to plant 
quarantine;  
11. Scientific research, preservation, restoration, re-creation, repair and adjustment of 
monuments of history and culture; 
12. Activities of sea port; 
13. Aero navigation services to users of air space of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
14. Formation and storage of the State commodity reserves; 15. Economic and business activities in the sphere of technical regulation and metrology; 
16. Production activities in the sphere of the criminal prosecution system and organization of 
employment of prisoners; 
17. Performance of functions on: 
- diagnostics of animal diseases; 
- epizootic monitoring of diseases of wild animals in the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
- maintenance of the National Collection of Deposited Strains of Microorganisms; - testing registration, approbation of veterinary specimens, feed additives, as well as 
control of series (lots) of drugs at their reclamation; 
- State monitoring, on provision of food security; - monitoring of safety of veterinary  drugs, feeds, and feed additives; 
- veterinary measures against extremely hazardous and enzootic animal diseases; 
- identification of agricultural animals; - provision of services on artificial insemination of animals; WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 314 - 
 
  - provision of services on transportation (delivery), storage of veterinary preparation 
against extremely hazardous and enzootic animal diseases, as well as transportation (delivery) of items (means) and attributes of veterinary purpose for conducting identification of agricultural animals; 
- maintenance of animal burial sites (biothermical pits), slaughter sites, built by local 
executive bodies of corresponding administrative territorial units; and 
- trapping and extermination of stray dogs and cats. 
18. Liquidation (termination, utilization, burial) of weapons, military equipment and other not 
used military property; leasing of defence objects; selling (including exports) and purchasing (including imports) of weapon, military equipment, ammunition, their spare and component parts, products, equipment and corresponding technology of double 
application for Armed Forces, other troops and military units of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan; 
19. Liquidation and conservation of State-owned hazardous inactive mines and coal 
enterprises, under the list determined by the Government, and also liquidation of 
consequences of their activities; 
20. Rendering and automatization of State services on "single window"; 
21. Performance of mountain rescue and other special operations in emergency and accident 
situations, protection from fire, flood and other natural disasters; 
22. Pre-school education and training, additional education, technical, professional and 
post-secondary education; 
23. Post-graduate education entities under th e President of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
24. Work safety and protection of employment, social protecti on of population, except for 
activities performed by the authorized organization according to Law No. 105-V "On 
Pension Safety" of 21 June 2013, culture and sports; 
25. Protection, ensuring sustainable use, reprod uction and breeding of fauna and flora species 
for the purposes of preserving biological diversity and genetic stock, and protection of 
nature (zoological gardens, botanical gardens and dendrological parks), and aviation works 
for protection and guarding of the forest reserves; 
26. Performance of topographic-geodesic and cartographic works; 27. Rendering of special social services to persons (families) in a difficult life situation; 
28. Classification and providing for technical safety of vessels. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 315 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(G) 
Share of State Enterprises in Gross Value Added by Economic Activities in 2005-2012 
General Classifier of Types of  Economic Activities 
(03-2003) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 
Gross Value Added, total 9.0 8.0 8.4 7.6 8.9  
Agriculture, forestry and fishery 7.0 7.0 7.1 6.7 5.9  
Industry 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.7  
Construction 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.3  
Trading, auto services and repair of household and 
personal appliances 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1  
Hotels and restaurants 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.6  
Transport and telecommunication 3.0 5.0 3.9 3.4 4.0  
Financial activities 7.0 6.0 6.1 6.0 7.6  
Real estate operations, leasing and consumer services 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.5 4.1  
Public administration 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0  
Education 73.0 78.0 78.0 81.4 82.8  
Healthcare and social services 66.0 65.0 66.1 70.3 71.1  
Utility services, personal services 26.0 26.0 26.9 30.6 31.0  
 
General Classifier of Types of Economic Activities 
(03-2007) 2010 2011 2012 
Gross Value Added, Total  9.3 9.6 9.1  
Agriculture, forestry and fishing 6.1 6.8 5.1  
Industry 0.7 0.8 0.9  
Mining and quarrying 0.0 0.0 0.0  
Manufacturing 0.4 0.3 0.5  
Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 6.1 7.4 7.4  
Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation activities 23.4 25.7 27.9  
Construction 1.9 2.2 2.3  
Wholesale and retail trade; repair of mo tor vehicles and motorcycles 0.1 0.1 0.0  
Transportation and storage 6.6 8.0 8.0  
Accommodation and food service activities 1.4 1.3 1.3  
Information and communication 5.8 5.4 5.5  
Financial and insurance activities 8.4 7.6 7.3  
Real estate activities 3.8 0.8 1.5  
Professional, scientific and technical activities 10.1 14.7 14.3  
Administrative and support service activities 4.8 4.7 4.6  
Public administration and defence, compulsory social security 100.0 100.0 100.0  
Education 78.5 80.1 76.9  
Human health and social work activities 86.1 88.5 72.9  
Arts, entertainment and recreation 63.6 62.1 64.5  
Other service activities 0.3 0.2 0.2  
Source: Statistics Agency. 
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 316 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(H) 
Share of State Property in Gross Value Added in Specific Areas in 2005-2012 
 Share of State Property in Gross Value Added, by Sectors of Economy (%) 
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 
Total 8.7 8.2 8.4 7.6 8.9 9.3 9.6 9.1  
Agriculture, forestry and 
fishery  7.3 6.8 7.1 6.7 5.9 6.1 6.8 5.1  
Industry 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 
Services* 12.7 12.0 11.9 11.4 13.2 14.3 14.8 13.6  
Source: Statistics Agency 
* Services include all sectors of services and construction. 
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 317 - 
 
  ANNEX 4 
List of Goods and Services for Internal Consumption for which Prices 
were regulated by the Government 
 
 I.  List of Services Provided by Natural Monopolies1 
No. Types of activities referred to the sphere of 
natural monopoly in accordance with Law No. 
272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated 
Markets" of 9 July 1998 Regulated types of services 
1. Transportation of oil and/or oil products by 
main pipelines   (1)  Operation of centralized routing;  
 (2)  Transportation of oil via main pipeline 
system;  
 (3)  Unloading of oil from railway tanks;   (4)  Loading of oil into railway tanks;   (5)  Loading of oil into tankers;   (6)  Unloading of oil from vehicle tankers;   (7)  Loading of oil into vehicle tankers;   (8)  Storage of oil;   (9)  Trans-shipment (conveyance) of oil; and,  (10)  Mixture of oil. 
  Storage and transportation of commercial gas  
via connecting, main pipelines, and/or distribution facilities; operation of group reservoir units;  and transportation of crude gas via connecting gas di stribution pipelines  - Transportation of commercial gas via connecting 
pipelines; - 
Transportation of commercial gas via main  
pipelines; - Transportation of commercial gas via distribution pipelines for consumers of th e Republic of Kazakhstan; 
- Transportation of liquefied gas via gas pipelines from group reservoirs to consumers; - Storage of commercial gas; and, - Transportation of crude gas via connecting pipelines. 
3. Delivery and/or distribution of  electric power  Delivery and/or distribution of electric power. 
4. Production, delivery, di stribution and/or supply 
of heating energy   - Production of heating energy; 
- Delivery and/or distribu tion of heating energy; 
- Supply of heating energy; - Production, delivery and distribution of heating energy; and, - Production, delivery, dist ribution and/or supply of 
heating energy.  
5. 6. Technical dispatching of delivery into the 
network and consumption of electric power  Management of balancing of production and consumption of electric power. - Technical dispatching of delivery into the network 
and consumption of electric power. - Management of balancing of production and consumption of electric power.  
7. 8. Services of main railway network 
Services of railways equipped with railway transportation facilities in accordance with concession agreements - Providing for use of mainline railway network;  
- Management of passage of rolling equipment by 
main railway network; - Providing for use of mainline railway network and management of passage of rolling equipment by mainline railway network; and, - Use of railways equipped with railway transportation facilities in accordance wi th concession agreements. 
9. Approaching railway services   - Provid ing approaching railway services for rolling 
equipment on condition that there was no competing approaching railway; - Providing approaching railway services for maneuvering operations, loading and unloading, other technological operations of transportation process as 
well as for lay-over of rolling equipment not provided in technological operations of transportation process on condition that there was no competing approaching railway. 
                                               
1 Source:  Government Resolution No. 155 of 14 March 2006. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 318 - 
 
  10. Aero-navigation services 
 - Aero-navigation servicing of aircrafts  within airspace 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan except for aero-navigation servicing of aircrafts operating international flights; - Aero-navigation servicing of aircrafts in the area of aerodrome, except for aero -navigation services of 
aircrafts operating international flights. 
11. 
12. Maritime port services 
Airport services - Loading and unloading conducted by facilities of 
maritime ports; 
- Services for vessel calls for loading and/or others purposes. - Services in take-off and landing of aircraft, except for servicing air carriage performing transit flights through air space of Kazakhstan with non-commercial technical landing in the airports of Kazakhstan; - Services in providing aviation safety except for servicing air carriage perform ing transit flights through 
air-space of Kazakhstan with  non-commerci al technical 
landing in the airports of Kazakhstan; - Providing parking space for aircraft (i) for passenger planes for longer than three hours after landing and (ii) for cargo certified aircrafts having cargo (mail) subject to loading/unloading in the airport of landing - for longer than six hours, except for servicing air carriage performing transit f lights through air-space of 
Kazakhstan with non-commerci al technical landing in 
the airports of Kazakhstan; - Providing parking space for aircraft in the base airdrome; and - Providing working place (area) to passenger registration. 
13. Telecommunication services under conditions 
of absence of competing operators for the 
reason of technological infeasibility or commercial inexpediency   (1)  Connection to public landline network of facilities 
(access points) of IP-operators (Internet Telephony) at 
the intercity level; and, (2)  Traffic transmission by connecting telecommunication operators from/to facilities (access points) of IP-operators (I nternet Telephony) being 
connected.   
14. Leasing or providing for use of cable channels 
and other basic facilities technologically related to connection of telecommunication networks to  telecommunications of common use:  Providing for use of telephone channels (underground 
conduits). 
15. Water management and sewerage system 
services   Water management sewera ge system services:  
- Supply of water by main pipelines; - Supply of water by di stribution networks; 
- Supply of water by channels.  Sewerage syst em services: 
- Drainage of sewage water; - Cleaning of sewage water. 
16. Public mail services  
  - Mailing of ordinary letters; 
- Mailing of post cards; - Mailing of postal wrappers. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 319 - 
 
  II. List of spheres of regulated markets2 
Spheres of regulated markets Re gulated market participants 
Railway transport Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Electric and heat energy Market partic ipants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Production of petroleum products Market pa rticipants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Oil transportation Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Civil aviation Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Harbour activities Market participan ts with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Telecommunications Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Postal Services Market participants  with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Gas (retail prices) Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
III.  List of goods for which prices are regulated by the Government 
Types of goods Legislative act 
Vodka, special vodka and other hard liquors   Law No. 429-I "On State Regulation of Production and 
Turnover of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products" of 16 July 1999; Government Resolution No. 1592 "On Establishing Minimum Pr ices for Alcohol Products" 
of 23 October 1999, as amended in February 2011 
Filter cigarettes of length between 45 mm and 85 mm, and of length between 87.1 mm and 160 mm Law No. 439 "On State Regulation of Production and 
Turnover of Tobacco Products" of 12 June 2003; Government Resolution No. 260 "On Establishing Minimum Retail Prices of Filter Cigarettes" of 4 April 2007 
Petroleum products Law No. 463-IV "On State Regulation of Production 
and Turnover of Certain Ty pes of Petroleum Products" 
of 20 July 2011 
Gas (wholesale prices) Law No. 532-IV of 9 January 2012 "On Gas and Gas 
Supply" and Government Resolution No. 1272 "On 
Establishing Maximum Wholesale Price of Liquefied Petroleum Gas on the Internal Market" of 8 October 2012 
 
 
                                               
2 Source:  Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 320 - 
 
  ANNEX 5(A)  
Requirements, Terms and Fees Applied for Registration of Various Legal Forms of 
Juridical Persons 
Legal forms List of documents 
to submit for State 
registration State 
registration 
terms Registration fee 
amount in 2014 
Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) was a 
partnership founded by one or several persons, registered capital of which was separated into shares in the amounts determined by the 
founding documents.  The participants of LLP took 
none of the company's li abilities and shared its 
risks only within the limits of the contributions made, except for the cases provided by the legislation.  1. Application for 
registration; 
2. Receipt or a 
copy of 
remittance 
order on payment of the registration fee.  1 working 
day KZT 12,038  
For small businesses: 
 
KZT 3,704  
Joint Stock Company (JSC) – was a juridical 
person, issuing shares with the purpose to attract funding for performance of their activities.  1. Application for 
registration; 
2. Founding 
charter if a JSC did not operate on the basis of a Model Charter; 
3. Protocol of the 
meeting of founders; 
4. Receipt or a 
copy of remittance order on 
payment of the 
registration fee. 10 working 
days KZT 12,038  
 
Production Cooperative – was a voluntary 
association of individuals on the basis of a membership for joint entrepreneurial activities, based on their personal working participation and unification of the partic ipants' contributions.  1. Application for 
registration; 
2. Receipt or a 
copy of remittance order on payment of the registration fee. 1  working 
day KZT  12,038   
For small businesses:
 
KZT  3,704  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 321 - 
 
  ANNEX 5(B) 
Calculation Methodology for Import/Export Licensing Fees and for Registration of 
Juridical Persons 
1. General Provisions 
 Rates of fees for licensing of goods exportation and importation and for registration of 
juridical persons are calculated in accordance wi th Article VIII of the GATT 1994.  The fee rates 
shall be fixed and their amounts shall equal to the amount of actual costs incurred by the 
governmental bodies during registering the juridi cal person and issuing the licence.  The fee rates 
shall be quoted in the national currency. 
2. Main Costs to be Included into Rates Calculation 1. For licensing of export/import of goods and State registration of juridical persons:  
 - utilities cost;  
 - communication services cost;  - transport services cost; 
 - electric power cost; 
 - heating cost; 
- maintenance, servicing and repair of buildings, premises, equipment and other 
capital assets; 
 - rent of offices;  - other services and works directly related to the process of rendering services;  - purchase of other goods directly related to the process of rendering services; 
- other current costs (data traffic, seasons, and international standards) the process 
of rendering services. 
2. For issuing duplicates and reregistering of ex port and import of goods and the duplicate for 
of the certificate on State registration (re-re gistration) of juridical persons, and branches 
and representatives thereof: 
 - rent of offices; 
 - electric power cost; 
 - purchase of other goods directly related to the process of rendering services. 
3. For State (statistical) re-registration and ceasing of the activity of juridical persons and 
branches and representatives thereof: 
 - utilities cost; 
 - communication services cost;  - transport services cost; 
 - electric power cost; 
 - heating cost; 
- maintenance, servicing and repair of buildings, premises, equipment and other 
capital assets; 
 - rent of offices;  - other services and works directly related to the process of rendering services;  - purchase of other goods directly related to the process of rendering services; 
- other current costs (data traffic, seasons, and international standards) the process 
of rendering services. 
3. Fee Rates Calculation Algorithm 
All actually incurred (or due) expenses under paragraph 2 herein shall be calculated per one State 
employee.  The amount of these expenses sha ll be the basis for the fee rates calculation. 
Depending on the inflation the fee rates may be adjusted. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 322 - 
 
  4. Conclusion 
Governmental bodies use the methodology to calculate the fee rates for the licensing of goods 
exportation and importation and for the State registration of juridical persons within their authority. 
Source: Order No. 105 of the Ministry of Econ omy and Budget Planning of 27 August 2005. 
   
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 323 - ANNEX 6 
Common List of Goods Subject to Bans and Re strictions on Importation and Exportation by  EAEU member States in Trade with Third Countries 
Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
1. Goods for which transportation  across the customs border of the EAEU is prohibited 
1.1 Ozone destroying 
substances   2903 77 100 0; 
2903 77 200 0; 2903 77 300 0; 2903 77 400 0; 2903 77 500 0; 2903 76 100 0; 2903 76 200 0; 2903 76 900 0; 2903 77 900 0; 2903 14 000 0; 2903 19 100 0; Ex. 2903 79 210 0; Ex. 2903 79 900 0; 
Ex. 2903 39 110 0; 
Ex. 3824 71 000 0; Ex. 3824 72 000 0; Ex. 3824 74 000 0 – Ex. 3824 79 000 0; 8415 10; 8415 81 00; 8415 82 000; 8418 61 00; Ex. 8418 69 000; 8418 10 200; 8418 10 800; Ex.8418 50; Ex. 8418 69 000; Ex. 8418; Ex. 8419; 8418 10 200;  8418 10 800; 8418 30 200; 8418 30 800; 8418 40 200; 8418 40 800; Ex. 8418 50; 
Ex. 8418 69 000; Import and export 
prohibition, all EAEU member States (except for goods in transit)     
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 324 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 8479 89 970 1; Ex. 8479 89 970 2; Ex. 3921 11 000 0 – Ex. 3921 19 000 0; Ex. 3907 20 200 1; Ex. 3907 20 200 9; Ex. 8424 10 000 0. 
1.2 Hazardous wastes   Ex. 0511 99 100 0; 
Ex. 2106 90 980 3; Ex. 2524; Ex. 2620; Ex. 2620 91 000 0; Ex. 2620 21 000 0; Ex. 2620 29 000 0; Ex. 2620 99 950 9; Ex. 2621; Ex. 2706 00 000 0; 2707 91 000 0; 2707 99; Ex. 2710; 2710 91 000 0; 2713 20 000 0; Ex. 2713 90; Ex. 2714 90 000 0; Ex. 28; Ex. 29; Ex. 2805 40; Ex. 2818; 
Ex. 2826 19 100 0; 
Ex. 2826 90 800 0; 2833 25 000 0; Ex. 2837; Ex. 2842; Ex. 2901 - 2942 00 000 0; Ex. 2903; Ex. 2908 99; Ex. 2915; Ex. 2916; Ex. 2917 Ex. 2918; Ex. 3006 92 000 0; Ex. 3101 00 000 0; Import prohibition 
(including goods in transit), all EAEU member States      
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 325 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 3802; Ex. 3808; Ex. 3811 11; Ex. 3824; Ex. 3824 90 610 0; Ex. 3825; Ex. 3825 30 000 0; Ex. 3825 41 000 0; Ex. 3825 50 000 0; Ex. 3825 61 000 0; Ex. 3825 69 000 0; Ex. 3915; Ex. 3923; 
Ex. 4013; 
Ex. 4017 00 000 0; Ex. 4101 – 4103; Ex. 4115 20 000 0; Ex. 4301;  
Ex. 4401 39; Ex. 4415; Ex. 4707; Ex. 4819; Ex. 5701 90; Ex. 5702 32; Ex. 5702 42; Ex. 5702 50 310 0; Ex. 5702 50 390 0; Ex. 5702 92 100 0; Ex. 5702 92 900 0; Ex. 5703 20; Ex. 5703 30; Ex. 5705 00 300 0; 6811 40 000; Ex. 6812; Ex. 7001 00 100 0; 
Ex. 7010; 
Ex. 7019; Ex. 7204; Ex. 7404 00; Ex. 7503 00; Ex.7602 00; Ex. 7802 00 000 0; Ex. 7902 00 000 0;  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 326 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 8002 00 000 0; Ex. 8101 97 000 0; Ex. 8102 97 000 0; Ex. 8103 30 000 0; Ex. 8104 20 000 0; Ex. 8104 30 000 0; Ex. 8104 90 000 0; Ex. 8105 30 000 0; Ex. 8106 00 100 0; Ex. 8107 30 000 0; Ex. 8108 30 000 0; Ex. 8109 30 000 0; Ex. 8110 20 000 0; 
Ex. 8111 00 190 0; 
Ex. 8112 13 000 0; Ex. 8112 22 000 0; Ex. 8112 52 000 0; Ex. 8112 92 100 0;  
Ex. 8112 92 210 1; Ex. 8112 92 210 9; Ex. 8113 00 400 0; Ex. 8539; Ex. 8540; Ex. 8548 10. 
1.3 Printed information or information on audio-visual and other devices containing information 
which may cause damage 
to political or economic interests of the republic, to its State security, to the health and morality of its citizens  Ex. 3706; 
Ex. 4901;  Ex. 4902; Ex. 4908; 
Ex. 4909 00 000 0; 
Ex. 4910 00 000 0; Ex. 4911; Ex. 8523. Import/export/transit 
prohibition, all EAEU member States      
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 327 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
1.4 Plant protection chemicals prohibited to be imported to the customs territory of the EAEU subject to Annexes A and B of the Stockholm Convention on persistent polluting substances signed in Stockholm on 22 May 2001 2903 82 000 0; 
2903 89 900 0; 2903 92 000 0; 2903 99; 2910 40 000 0; 2910 90 000 0; 3808 50 000 9; 3808 91 200 0; 3824 82 000 0. Import prohibition, all 
EAEU member States (except for goods in transit)    
1.5 Timber, recovered 
paper, paperboard and wastepaper  Ex. 4401 10 000 0;  
Ex. 4401 31 000 0; Ex. 4401 39; 4403 10 000 -  4403 20; 4403 91 – 4403 99; 4404; 4406; 4407 10; 4407 99 980; 4707. Export prohibition, 
Kazakhstan    
1.6 Office or civil weapon, 
its main parts and cartridges  Ex. 93; 
Ex. 9303; Ex. 9304 00 000 0; Ex. 9306 21 000 0; Ex. 9306 30; Ex. 9306 90; Ex. 9307 00 000 0. Import/export/transit 
prohibition, all EAEU member States (except for goods, subject to the export control system)    
1.7 Implements for 
catching aquatic biological resources  Ex. 5608 11 800 0;  
8543 20 000 0. Import prohibition, all 
EAEU member States     
1.8 Skins of Greenland 
seals and baby seals  Ex. 4301 80 709 5; 
Ex. 4301 80 709 7; Ex. 4301 90 009 0; Ex. 4302 19 410 0; Ex. 4302 19 499 0; Ex. 4302 20 009 0; Ex. 4302 30 100 0; Ex. 4303 10 101 0; Ex. 4303 10 109 0; Ex. 4303 10 908 0; Ex. 4303 10 909 0; Import prohibition, all 
EAEU member States      
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 328 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 4302 30 510 0; Ex. 4302 30 559 0; Ex. 6506 99 908 0. 
2. Goods which transportation across the customs border of the EAEU is restricted 
2.1 Ozone destroying substances and products containing such substances 
 Ex. 2903 71 000  0; Ex. 2903 73 000  0; Ex. 2903 74 000  0; Ex. 2903 75 000  0; Ex. 2903 79 110  0; Import and export 
licensing, all EAEU member States (except for goods in transit) Ministry of Energy 
 None Activity licence is not 
required  
2.2 Plant protection chemicals  Ex. 3808 Import licensing, all EAEU 
member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Agriculture; 
Ministry of Energy  Activity licence for 
production, processing, purchase, storage, sale, use and 
destruction of toxic 
substances (Article 14.1 of the Law on Licensing) is required and issued by  the Ministry of Investments and Development 
2.3 Hazardous wastes  Ex. 0511 99 100 0; 
2307 00; Ex. 2520 10 000 0; Ex. 2530 90 000  9; 2618 00 000 0; Ex. 2619 00; Ex. 2619 00 900 0; 
Ex. 2620 
2620 11 000 0; Ex. 2620 19 000 0; Ex. 2620 21 000 0 – Ex. 2620 29 000 0; Ex. 2620 29 000 0; Ex. 2620 30 000 0; Ex. 2620 40 000 0; 2620;  Ex. 2620 60 000 0; Ex. 2620 91 000 0; Ex. 2620 99 950 9; Ex. 2621 Ex. 28; Import and/or export 
licensing, all EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Energy 
 Activity licence for 
collection (purchase), storage, processing and sale of scrap and waste of nonferrous and ferrous metals by juridical persons is 
required (Article 12.3 
of the Law on Licensing) and issued by Government executives (Akims) of Oblast, Cities of Astana and Almaty  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 329 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 2805 40; Ex. 2806 10 000 0; Ex. 2807 00; Ex. 2808 00 000 0; Ex. 2811 11 000 0; Ex. 2811 19 100 0; Ex. 2814 20 000 0; Ex. 2815 12 000 0; Ex. 2815 20 000 0; Ex. 2837; Ex. 2907; Ex. 2908; Ex. 2926; 
Ex. 2929; 
Ex. 3206; Ex. 3208; Ex. 3212; Ex. 3504 00; Ex. 3802; Ex. 3824; Ex. 3825; Ex. 3825 41 000 0; Ex. 3825 49 000 0; Ex. 3825 61 000 0; Ex. 3912 20; Ex. 4004 00 000 0; Ex. 4012 20 000 0; Ex. 4101 – 4103; Ex. 4115 10 000 0; Ex. 4115 20 000 0; Ex. 4301; Ex. 5003 00 000 0; Ex. 5103 20 000 0;  
Ex. 5202 10 000 0; Ex. 5505; 
Ex. 5601 30 000 0; 
Ex. 7112 30 000 0; Ex. 7112 99 000 0; Ex. 7204; Ex. 7404 00; Ex. 7503 00; Ex. 7602 00; Ex. 7802 00 000 0;  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 330 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 7902 00 000 0; Ex. 8002 00 000 0; Ex. 8101 97 000 0; Ex. 8102 97 000 0; Ex. 8103 30 000 0; Ex. 8104 20 000 0; Ex. 8105 30 000 0; Ex. 8106 00 100 0; Ex. 8107 30 000 0; Ex. 8108 30 000 0; Ex. 8109 30 000 0; Ex. 8110 20 000 0; Ex. 8111 00 190 0; 
Ex. 8112 13 000 0; 
Ex. 8112 22 000 0; Ex. 8112 52 000 0; Ex. 8112 92 210 9; Ex. 8113 00 400 0; Ex. 85 Ex. 8548 10 910 0; Ex. 8548 10 100 0; Ex. 8548 10 210 0; Ex. 8548 10 290 0; Ex. 2620. 
2.4 Collectible materials in mineralogy and palaeontology  Ex. 9601; 
Ex. 9705 00 000 0. Export licensing, all EAEU 
member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development  Ministry of Education and 
Science;  Ministry of Culture and Sports; 
 
Ministry of Investments and 
Development Activity licence is not 
required 
2.6 Wild live animals,  certain wild growing plants and wild growing crude drug Ex. 01; 
Ex. 0301; Ex. 0306; Ex. 0307; Ex. 0308; Ex. 0407; 0802 90 500 0; 1211; 1212 21 000 0; 1212 29 000 0; Ex. 1302. Export licensing, all EAEU 
member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Agriculture 
 Activity licence is not 
required 
2.7 Species of wild fauna and flora subject to the No CN Codes are 
provided. Only the Export restriction, all EAEU 
member States (the goods Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Agriculture Activity licence is not 
required   
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 331 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora   names of species of wild 
fauna and flora are specified.  included into this list are 
not subject to licensing and transported through the customs border of the EAEU member States in accordance with the order established by the Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora as of 3 March 1973) 
2.8 Rare and endangered species of wild animals and wild growing plants and parts thereof and/or derivates inscribed in the "Red books" of the EAEU member States  Ex. 0101 – 0106; 
Ex. 0301; 0306 -  0308; Ex. 0601 – 0604; Ex. 07; Ex. 1211; Ex. 1212; Ex. 20; Ex. 2102. Export licensing, all EAEU 
member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Agriculture Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 332 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.9 Precious metals and gems  Ex. 2530 90 900 1;  
7101 10 000 0; Ex. 7102 21 000 0; 7102 31 000 0; 7103 10 000 0; 7103 91 000 0; 7103 99 000 0; 7106; 7106 10 000 0; 7106 91 000; 7108; 7108 11 000 0; 7108 12 000; 
7108 20 000; 
7110; 7110 11 000; 7110 19 100 0; 7110 21 000; 7110 29 000 0; 7110 31 000 0; 7110 41 000 0. Export licensing, all EAEU 
member States (except for precious metals exported by the Central (National) Banks of the EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development Activity licence is not 
required  
2.10 Unprocessed precious metals, waste and scrap of precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals and commodities containing precious metals  2603 00 000 0; 
2604 00 000 0; 2607 00 000 0; 2608 00 000 0; 2609 00 000 0; 2616; Ex. 2617; 
2620 19 000 0; 
2620 21 000 0; 2620 29 000 0; 2620 30 000 0; 2620 91 000 0; 2620 99 100 0; 2620 99 400 0; 2620 99 950 1; 2620 99 950 2; 2620 99 950 3; 2620 99 950 9; Ex. 2621; 7106 91 000; 7108 12 000 9; 7110 11 000 9; Export licensing, all EAEU 
member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 333 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
7110 21 000 9; 7110 31 000 0; 7110 41 000 0; 7112; 7401 00 000 0; 7402 00 000 0; 7501; 7801 99 100 0. 
2.11 Mineral raw materials (only untreated stones)  Ex. 7103 10 000 0; 
Ex. 2530 90 000 1 Export licensing, all EAEU 
member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development Activity licence is not 
required 
2.12 Drugs, substances with psychotropic effects and their precursors 1209 99 910 0; 
1211 30 000 0; 1211 40 000 0; 1211 90 850 0;  
1301 90 000 0; 1302 11 000 0; 1302 19 800 0; 2806 10 000 0; 2807 00 100 0; 
2812 10 950 0; 
2841 61 000 0; 2902 30 000 0; 2902 90 000 0; 2903 39 190 0; 2903 99 900 0; 2904 20 000 0; 2905 39 250 0; 2905 51 000 0; 2907 19 900 0; 2909 11 000 0; 2909 30 900 0; 2912 21 000 0; 2912 49 000 0; 2914 11 000 0; 2914 12 000 0; 2914 31 000 0; 2914 50 000 0; 2915 21 000 0; 2915 24 000 0; 2915 90 000 0; 2916 12 000 0; Import and/or export 
licensing, all EAEU member States  Ministry of Internal Affair s None Activity licence for 
circulation of drugs (narcotics), psychoactive substances, precursors is required (Article 17 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by  
the  Ministry of 
Internal Affairs  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 334 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2916 14 000 0; 2916 34 000 0; 2918 19 980 0; 2920 90 100 0; 2921 11 000 0; 2921 19 990 0; 2921 30 100 0; 2921 46 000 0; 2921 49 000 0; 2922 14 000 0;  
2922 19 850 0; 2922 29 000 0; 2922 31 000 0; 
2922 39 000 0; 
2922 43 000 0; 2922 44 000 0; 2922 49 850 0;  
2922 50 000 0; 2924 23 000 0; 2924 24 000 0; 2924 29 980 0; 2925 12 000 0; 2926 90 950 0; 2926 30 000 0; 2924 11 000 0; 2924 29 980 0; 2930 90 990 0; 2932 11 000 0;  2932 20 900 0; 2932 91 000 0; 2932 92 000 0; 2932 93 000 0; 2932 94 000 0; 2932 95 000 0; 2932 99 000 0; 
2933 29 900 0; 
2933 32 000 0; 2933 33 000 0; 2933 39 990 0; 2933 41 000 0; 2933 49 300 0; 2933 49 900 0; 2933 53 100 0;  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 335 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2933 53 900 0; 2933 55 000 0; 2933 59 950 0; 2933 72 000 0; 2933 91 100 0; 2933 91 900 0; Ex. 2933 99; 2933 99 800;  2933 99 800 9;  2934 91 000 0; 2934 99 900 0; 2939 11 000 0; 2939 19 000 0; 
2939 41 000 0 -  
2939 49 000 0; 2939 51 000 0; 2939 61 000 0; 2939 62 000 0; 2939 63 000 0; 2939 69 000 0; 2939 91 000 0;  
2939 99 000 0; Ex. 3003; 3003 40 000 0; 3003 90 000 0; Ex. 3004; 3004 40 000; 3004 40 000 9; 3004 90 000 2;  3004 90 000 9;  3824 90 970.  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 336 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.13 Toxic substances except for precursors of the drugs and substances with psychotropic effects   Ex. 1211 90 850 0;  
Ex. 1302 19 800 0; 2804 70 001 0; 2804 80 000 0; Ex. 2805 40; Ex. 2811 29 900 0; Ex. 2837 11 000 0; Ex. 2837 19 000 0; Ex. 2842 90 800 0; Ex. 2843 29 000 0; Ex. 2848 00 000 0; Ex. 2852 10 000 7;  Ex. 2852 90 000 8;  
2905 11 000 0; 
Ex. 2905 59; Ex. 2907 11 000 0;  
Ex. 2922 19 850 0; Ex. 2924 19 000 0; Ex. 2926 90 950 0;   
Ex. 2930 90 990 0; Ex. 2931 10 000 0; Ex. 2931 90 900 9;  Ex. 2933 39 990 0; Ex. 2939 20 000 0; Ex. 2939 99 000 0; Ex. 3001 90 980 0; Ex. 8112 51 000 0. Import/export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of National Economy 
 Activity licence for 
production, processing, purchase, storage, sale, use and destruction of toxic substances is required (Article 14.1 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Investments and Development 
2.14 Medicines and 
pharmaceutical products  
  Ex. 2106 90 980 3; 
Ex. 2106 90 980 9; 
Ex. 2904 - Ex. 2909; Ex. 2912-  Ex. 2942 00 000 0; Ex. 2936; Ex. 3001; Ex. 3002; Ex. 3003; Ex. 3004; 3006 30 000 0; 3006 60; Ex. 3913. Import restriction, all EAEU 
member States  
   Activity licence for 
pharmaceutical 
activity is required (Article 26.2 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Public Health and Social Development   
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 337 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.16 Civil radio-electronic and/or high-frequency means including built-in or forming part of other goods    Ex. 8419; 
Ex. 8470; Ex. 8471; Ex. 8514; 8516 50 000 0; Ex. 8517; Ex. 8517 12 000 0; Ex. 8517 62 000 9; Ex. 8517 69 900 0; Ex. 8518; Ex. 8518 10; Ex. 8519; Ex. 8521; 
Ex. 8525; 
Ex. 8526; Ex. 8527; Ex. 8528; Ex. 8531; Ex. 8540; Ex. 90; Ex. 9018; Ex. 9021; Ex. 9027. Import licensing, all EAEU 
member States   Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development Activity licence is not 
required  
2.17 Special devices for unauthorized obtaining of information   Ex. 8301 70 000 0; 
Ex. 8471;  Ex. 8505 90 200 0; Ex. 8517 61 000; Ex. 8517 62 000; 
Ex. 8517 69 390 0; 
Ex. 8517 69 900 0; Ex. 8517 70 900 1; Ex. 8518 30 950 0; Ex. 8518 40; Ex. 8519 81 550; Ex. 8519 81 510 0; Ex. 8519 81 610; Ex. 8519 81 650; Ex. 8519 81 750; Ex. 8519 81 850; Ex. 8519 89 900; Ex. 8521; Ex. 8523 51; Ex. 8523 29 310 1; Import/export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development National Security Commit tee Activity licence for 
development,  production, repair and sale of special technical devices 
designed for 
conducting of operative-investigation activities is required (Article 19 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the  National Security Committee  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 338 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 8523 29 310 2; Ex. 8523 49 250 0; Ex. 8523 49 450 0; Ex. 8523 49 910 1; Ex. 8523 51 910 1; Ex. 8523 59 910 1; Ex. 8523 80 910 1; Ex. 8525 50 000 0; Ex. 8525 60 000 0; Ex. 8525 80; Ex. 8526 10 000 9; Ex. 8526 91; Ex. 8527; 
Ex. 8529 10 390 0; 
Ex. 9002; Ex. 9006 51 000 0; Ex. 9006 52 000 9; Ex. 9006 53 100 0; Ex. 9019 10 900 9; Ex. 9022 19 000 0. 
2.19 Encryption devices   Ex. 8443 31; 
Ex. 8443 32 100 9; Ex. 8443 32 300 0; Ex. 8443 99 100 9; Ex. 8470 10 000 9; Ex. 8470 50 000; Ex. 8471 30 000 0; Ex. 8471 41 000 0; 
Ex. 8471 49 000 0; 
Ex. 8471 50 000 0; Ex. 8471 70 500 0; Ex. 8471 70 980 0; Ex. 8471 80 000 0; Ex. 8471 90 000 0; Ex. 8473 21 100 0; Ex. 8473 21 900 0; Ex. 8473 30 200 9; Ex. 8473 30 800 9; Ex. 8517 11 000 0; Ex. 8517 12 000 0; Ex. 8517 18 000 0; Ex. 8517 61 000 1; Ex. 8517 61 000 2; Import/export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development National Security Commit tee Activity licence for 
development and sale (including other types of transfer) of  cryptographic devices of information protection  is required (Article 18 of the Law 
on Licensing) and 
issued by the  National Security Committee  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 339 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 8517 61 000 8; Ex. 8517 62 000; Ex. 8517 69 390 0; Ex. 8517 69 900 0; Ex. 8517 70 900; Ex. 8523 29 310 1; Ex. 8523 29 310 2; Ex. 8523 29 330; Ex. 8523 49 250 0; Ex. 8523 49 450 0; Ex. 8523 49 910 1; Ex. 8523 49 930 0; Ex. 8523 51 910 1; 
Ex. 8523 51 930 0; 
Ex. 8523 52; Ex. 8523 59 910 1; Ex. 8523 59 930 0; Ex. 8523 80 910 1; Ex. 8523 80 930 0;  
Ex. 8525 50 000 0; Ex. 8525 60 000 0; Ex. 8528 71 130 0;  
Ex. 8529 90 200 1;  
Ex. 8529 90 650 0; Ex. 8529 90 970 0; Ex. 8526 91 200 0; Ex. 8526 91 800 0; Ex. 8526 92 000;  
Ex. 8542 31 901 1; Ex. 8542 31 909 9; Ex. 8542 32 900 9; Ex. 8543 70 900 0; Ex. 8543 90 000 9. 
2.20 Cultural values, documents of the national archive funds, originals of the archive documents  Ex. 37; 
Ex. 39; Ex. 40; Ex. 42; Ex. 44; Ex. 4420; Ex. 46; Ex. 49; Ex. 4907 00; Ex. 57; Export licensing, all EAEU 
member States   Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Culture and Sports Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 340 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 58; Ex. 61; Ex. 62; Ex. 63; Ex. 64; Ex. 65; Ex. 66; Ex. 69; Ex. 6913; Ex. 70; Ex. 7018; Ex. 7113; Ex. 7114; 
Ex. 7117; 
Ex. 7118; Ex. 73; Ex. 74; Ex. 75; Ex. 76; Ex. 78; Ex. 79; Ex. 80; Ex. 81; Ex. 82; Ex. 8306; Ex. 84; Ex. 85; Ex. 87; Ex. 88; Ex. 89; Ex. 90; Ex. 91; Ex. 92; Ex. 93; Ex. 94; 
Ex. 95; 
Ex. 96; Ex. 9611 00 000 0; Ex. 97; Ex. 9702 00 000 0; Ex. 9705 00 000 0.  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 341 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.21 Human organs and tissues, blood and its components Ex. 3001 90 200 0; 
Ex. 3002 10 910 0; Ex. 3002 10 950; Ex. 3002 90 100 0. Import and (or) export 
licensing, all EAEU member States   Ministry of Public Health and 
Social Development None Activity licence for 
medical activity is required (Article 26.1 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Public Health and Social Development  
2.22 Official and civil weapon, its main parts and cartridges  Ex. 9302 00 000 0; 
Ex. 9303; Ex. 9303 20 100 0; Ex. 9303 20 950 0; Ex. 9303 30 000 0;  Ex. 9304 00 000 0; Ex. 9305 10 000 0; Ex. 9305 20 000 0; Ex. 9306 21 000 0; Ex. 9306 30 100 0; Ex. 9306 30 900 0;  
Ex. 9306 29 000 0; Ex. 9306 30 900 0; Ex. 8211; Ex. 9307 00 000 0; Ex. 9506 99 900 0. Import/export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Internal Affa irs  Activity licence for 
development, manufacture, repair, trade, collecting, exhibit of civil and official fire-arms and their cartridge shells is required (Article 20.5 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.  
2.23 Information on subsoil  Export licensing, all EAEU 
member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development  Activity licence is not 
required 
2.24 Goods subject to quantitative restrictions  7204 (*); 
7404 00 (*); 7503 00 (*); 7602 00 (*).  Export and/or import 
restriction.   - (*) Applied to the goods originating from the Republic of Belarus when exported from the customs territory of the EAEU. 
Application of the exclusive 
right is regulated by the Belarus' legislation; N/A N/A N/A  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 342 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.25 Goods subject to licensing   1701 13*; 
1701 14*; Ex. 2709 00**; 2710**;  
2712 10**; 2713**; 3102**; 3103**; 3105**. Export and/or import 
approval.  Applied to: *- the goods imported to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan from the third countries **- the goods, originating 
from the Republic of Belarus when exported from the custom s territory 
of the EAEU  Ministry of National Economy  Ministry of Agriculture Activity licence is not 
required   
2.26 Goods subject export/import monopoly Goods subject to export 
exclusive licenses  2711 11 000 0 (*); 2711 21 000 0 (*); 3104 (**).  Goods subject to import exclusive licenses (***)  1604; 2401; 2402; 2403; 2207; 2208 90 910; 2208 90 990; 
Ex. 1302; 
Ex. 2101; 2103 90 300 0; Ex. 2103 90 900 9; Ex. 2106 90 200 0; Ex. 3302 10; 2204; 2205; 2206 00; 2208 60; 2208 20; 2208 30; 2208 40; 2208 50; 2208 70; - (*) Applied to the goods 
originating from the Russian Federation when exported from the customs territory of the EAEU.  Application of the exclusive right is regulated by the Russian Federation's legislation;  - (**) Applied to the goods originating from the Republic of Belarus when exported from the customs territory of the EAEU.  Application of the exclusive right is regulated by the Belarus' legislation; 
- (***) Applied to the 
goods originating from the third countries when imported to the Republic of Belarus. Application of the exclusive rights is regulated by the Belarus' legislation.  N/A N/A N/A  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 343 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2208 09 (except 2208 09 910 0, 2208 09 990 0). 
2.27 Goods subject to Tariff Rate Quotas 0201 10 000 1; 
0201 20 200 1; 
0201 20 300 1; 
0201 20 500 1; 0201 20 900 1; 0201 30 000 4; 0202 10 000 1; 0202 20 100 1; 0202 20 300 1; 0202 20 500 1; 0202 20 900 1; 0202 30 100 4; 0202 30 500 4; 0202 30 900 4; 0203 11 100 1; 0203 11 900 1; 0203 12 110 1; 0203 12 190 1; 0203 12 900 1; 0203 19 110 1; 0203 19 130 1; 0203 19 150 1; 0203 19 550 1; 0203 19 590 1; 0203 19 900 1; 
0203 21 100 1; 
0203 21 900 1; 0203 22 110 1; 0203 22 190 1; 0203 22 900 1; 0203 29 110 1; 0203 29 130 1; 0203 29 150 1; 0203 29 550 1; 0203 29 590 1; 0203 29 900 1; 0203 29 550 2; 0203 29 900 2; 0207 11 100 1; 0207 11 300 1; Import TRQ, all EAEU 
member States (within 
EAEU member State TRQ).  
Import procedure is determined by a Decision of the Commission in 
accordance with  Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty  Ministry of National Economy  
 None Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 344 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
0207 11 900 1; 0207 12 100 1; 0207 12 900 1; 0207 13 100 1; 0207 13 200 1; 0207 13 300 1; 0207 13 400 1; 0207 13 500 1; 0207 13 600 1; 0207 13 700 1; 0207 13 910 1; 0207 13 990 1; 0207 14 100 1; 
0207 14 200 1; 
0207 14 300 1; 0207 14 400 1; 0207 14 500 1; 0207 14 600 1; 0207 14 700 1; 0207 14 910 1; 0207 14 990 1; 0207 24 100 1; 0207 24 900 1; 0207 25 100 1; 0207 25 900 1; 0207 26 100 1; 0207 26 200 1; 0207 26 300 1; 0207 26 400 1; 0207 26 500 1; 0207 26 600 1; 0207 26 700 1; 0207 26 800 1; 0207 26 910 1; 0207 26 990 1; 
0207 27 100 1; 
0207 27 200 1; 0207 27 300 1; 0207 27 400 1; 0207 27 500 1; 0207 27 600 1; 0207 27 700 1; 0207 27 800 1;  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 345 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
0207 27 910 1; 0207 27 990 1; 0207 41 200 1; 0207 41 300 1; 0207 41 800 1; 0207 51 100 1; 0207 51 900 1; 0207 60 050 1; 0207 42 300 1; 0207 42 800 1; 0207 52 100 1; 0207 52 900 1; 0207 60 050 1; 
0207 53 000 1; 
0207 53 000 1; 0207 43 000 1; 0207 54 100 1; 0207 44 100 1; 0207 60 100 1; 0207 44 210 1; 0207 54 210 1; 0207 60 210 1; 0207 60 310 1; 0207 44 310 1; 0207 54 310 1; 0207 60 410 1; 0207 44 410 1; 0207 54 410 1; 0207 54 510 1; 0207 44 510 1; 0207 60 510 1; 0207 54 610 1; 0207 44 610 1; 0207 60 610 1; 0207 44 710 1; 
0207 54 710 1; 
0207 60 810 1; 0207 44 810 1; 0207 54 810 1; 0207 44 910 1; 0207 54 910 1; 0207 60 910 1; 0207 44 990 1;  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 346 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
0207 54 990 1; 0207 60 990 1; 0207 55 100 1; 0207 45 100 1; 0207 60 100 1; 0207 45 210 1; 0207 55 210 1; 0207 60 210 1; 0207 45 310 1; 0207 55 310 1; 0207 45 410 1; 0207 55 410 1; 0207 55 510 1; 
0207 45 510 1; 
0207 60 510 1; 0207 55 610 1; 0207 45 610 1; 0207 60 610 1; 0207 45 710 1; 0207 55 710 1; 0207 60 810 1; 0207 45 810 1; 0207 55 810 1; 0207 55 930 1; 0207 45 930 1; 0207 45 950 1; 0207 55 950 1; 0207 60 910 1; 0207 45 990 1; 0207 55 990 1; 0207 60 990 1. 
2.28 Goods subject to restrictions in accordance with the commitments undertaken upon accession to the WTO 4403 20 110 1; 
4403 20 110 2; 4403 20 190 1; 4403 20 190 9; 4403 20 310 1; 4403 20 310 2; 4403 20 390 1; 4403 20 390 9. Export tariff quotas. 
The Russian Federation. N/A N/A N/A  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 347 - Description CET code ( HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.29 Goods subject to import licensing on the basis of application of import quotas as a special safeguards  7304 11 000 1; 
7304 11 000 2; 7304 11 000 3;  7304 11 000 4;  7304 11 000 8; 7304 41 000 9; 7304 49 100 0; 7304 49 930 0; 7304 49 950 0; 7304 49 990 0; 7306 11 100 0; 7306 11 900 0; 7306 40 200 1; 
7306 40 200 9; 
7306 40 800  2; 7306 40 
800 8; 8433 51 000 1; 8433 51 000 9; 8433 90 000 0.  Import  licensing, all EAEU 
member States   Ministry of National Economy None Activity licence is not 
required 
 
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 348 - 
 
  ANNEX 7 
List of Sensitive Products, where Decision on  the Level of Import Duties shall be Taken 
by Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC) Parties Consensus1 
CET Code  Description of products  
0201 Meat of bovine animal s, fresh or chilled.  
0202 Meat of bovine animals, frozen.  
0203 Meat of swine, fresh, chilled, or frozen.  
0207 Meat and edible offal, of the poultry of Heading N° 0105, fresh, chilled, or frozen.  
0301 Live fish.  
0302 Fish, fresh or chilled, excluding fish fill ets and other fish me at of Heading 0304.  
0303 Fish, frozen, excluding fish fillets and other fish meat of Heading 0304.  
0304 Fish fillets and other fish meat (whether or not minced), fresh, chilled or frozen.  
0401 Milk and cream, not concentrated nor containi ng added sugar or other sweetening matter.  
0402 Milk and cream, concentrated or containing  added sugar or othe r sweetening matter.  
0403 Buttermilk, curdled milk and cream, yogurt, kephir and other fermented or acidified milk and 
cream, whether or not concentrated or containi ng added sugar or other sweetening matter or 
flavoured or containing added fruit, nuts or cocoa.  
0405 Butter and other fats and oils derived from milk; dairy spreads.  
0406 Cheese and curd. 
0407 00  Birds eggs, in shell, fre sh, preserved or boiled  
0408 Birds' eggs, not in shell and egg yolks, fresh, dried, cooked by  steaming or by boiling in water, 
moulded, frozen, or ot herwise preserved, whether or not containing added sugar or other 
sweetening matter.  
0602 Other live plants (including their roots), cuttings and slips; mushroom spawn.  
0701 Potatoes, fresh or chilled.  
0703 Onions, shallots, garlic, leeks and other alliaceous vegetables, fresh or chilled.  
0704 Cabbages, cauliflowers, kohlrabi, kale and si milar edible brassicas, fresh or chilled.  
0706 Carrots, turnips, salad beetroot, sals ify, celeriac, radishes and simila r edible roots, fresh or chilled.  
0707 00  Cucumbers and gherkins, fresh or chilled.  
0808 Apples, pears and quinces, fresh.  
0810 Other fruit, fresh.  
1002 
00 000 0  Rye. 
1003 00  Barley.  
1006 Rice. 
1101 00  Wheat or wheat-rye flour.  
1102 Cereal flours other than of wheat or meslin.  
1103 Cereal groats, meal and pellets.  
1104 Cereal grain otherwise worked (for example, hull ed, rolled, flaked, pearled, sliced or kibbled), 
except rice of Heading 1006; germ of cereals, whole, rolled, flaked or ground.  
1107 Malt, whether or not roasted.  
1108 Starches; inulin.  
1507 Soya-bean oil and its fractions, whether or not refined but not chemically modified.  
1511 Palm oil and its fractions, whether or no t refined, but not ch emically modified.  
1512 Sunflower-seed, safflower or cotton-seed oil and fra ctions thereof, whether or not refined but not 
chemically modified.  
1513 Coconut (copra), palmkernel or babassu oil and fra ctions thereof, whether or not refined but not 
chemically modified.  
1514 Rape, colza or mustard oil and fra ctions thereof, whether or no t refined, but not chemically 
modified.  
1517 Margarine; edible mixtures or preparations of anim al or vegetable fats or oils or of fractions of 
different fats or oils of this Ch apter, other than edible fats or oils or their fractions of Heading 
1516. 
1601 00  Sausages and similar products from meat, meat su b-products or blood; finished food products, 
made on the basis thereof.  
1701 Cane or beet sugar and chemically  pure sucrose, in solid form.  
1704 Sugar confectionery (including white chocolate), not containing cocoa.  
1806 Chocolate and other food preparations containing cocoa.  
                                               
1 Not all 10 digit HS codes within a 4 digit HS subgroup may be included in the list. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 349 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
1901 Malt extract; food preparations of flour, meal, starch or malt extract, not containing cocoa or 
containing less than 40% by weight of cocoa calc ulated on a totally defatted basis, not elsewhere 
specified or included; food preparations of goods of Headings 0401 to 0404, not containing cocoa or containing less than 5% by weight of coco a calculated on a totally defatted basis, not 
elsewhere specified of included.
 
1905 Bread, pastry, cakes, biscuits and other bake rs' wares, whether or not containing cocoa; 
communion wafers, empty cachets of a kind suitable  for pharmaceutical use,  sealing wafers, rice 
paper, and similar products.  
2001 Vegetables, fruit, nuts and other edible parts of plants, prepared  or preserved by vinegar or acetic 
acid. 
2005 Other vegetables prepared or preserved otherwis e than by vinegar or acetic acid, not frozen, 
other than products of Heading 2006.  
2007 Jams, fruit jellies, marmalades, fruit or nut puree, and fruit or nut  pastes, being cooked 
preparations, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter.  
2008 Fruit, nuts and other edible parts of plants, ot herwise prepared or preserved, whether or not 
containing added sugar or other sweetening matter  or spirit, not elsewhere specified or included.  
2009 Fruit juices (including grape must) and vegetabl e juices, unfermented and not containing added 
spirit, whether or not containing adde d sugar or other sweetening matter.  
2102 Yeasts (active or inactive); other single-cell micro-organisms, dead (but not including vaccines of 
Heading 3002); prepared baking powders.  
2207 Undenatured ethyl alcohol of an alcoholic strength  by volume of 80% or higher; ethyl alcohol and 
other spirits, denature d, of any strength.  
2208 Undenatured ethyl alcohol of an alcoholic strength  by volume of less than 80%; spirits, liqueurs 
and other spirituous beverages.  
2304 00 000
 Millcake and other solid wastes from extracts of soy oil, milled or not milled, granulated or not granulated.
 
2522 Quicklime, slaked lime and hydraulic lime, other than calcium oxide and hydroxide of Heading 
2825. 
2523 Portland cement, aluminous cement, slag cement , super-sulphate cement and similar hydraulic 
cements, whether or not coloured  or in the form of clinkers.  
2615 Niobium, tantalum, vanadium or zirconium ores and concentrates.  
2620 Ash and residues (other than from the manufacture of  iron or steel), containing arsenic, metals or 
metal compounds.  
2707 Oils and other products of the distillation of high  temperature coal tar; similar products in which 
the weight of the aromatic constituents exceeds that of the non-aromatic constituents.  
2708 Pitch and pitch coke, obtained from co al tar or from other mineral tars.  
2710 Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous  minerals, other than crude; preparations not 
elsewhere specified or included, containing by weig ht 70% or more of petroleum oils or of oils 
obtained from bituminous minerals, these oils be ing the basic constituents of the preparations; 
used oils.  
2711 Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons.  
2712 Petroleum jelly; paraffin wax, microcrystalline pe troleum wax, slack wax, ozokerite, lignite wax, 
peat wax, other mineral waxes, an d similar products obtained by sy nthesis or by other processes, 
whether or not coloured.  
2713 Petroleum coke, petroleum bitumen and other residues  of petroleum oils or of oils obtained from 
bituminous minerals.  
2801 Fluorine, chlorine, bromine and iodine.  
2802 00 000 0
 Sublimed or precipitated sulphur; colloidal sulphur.  
2803 00  Carbon.  
2804 Hydrogen, rare gases and other non-metals.  
2805 Alkali or alkaline-earth metals; rare-earth metals, scandium and yttrium, whether or not intermixed or interalloyed; mercury.
 
2806 Hydrogen chloride (hydrochloric acid); chlorosulphuric acid.  
2807 00  Sulphuric acid, oleum.  
2808 00 000 0
 Hydrogen nitrate; sulpho-nitrogen acids.  
2809 Diphosphorus pentaoxide; phosphor ic acid and polyphosphoric acids, whether or not chemically 
defined.  
2810 00  Boric oxides, boric acids.  
2811 Other inorganic acids and other inorganic oxygen compounds of non-metals.  
2812 Halides and halide oxides of non-metals.  
2813 Sulphides of non-metals; commercial phosphorus trisulphide.  
2814 Ammonia, anhydrous or in aqueous solution.  
2815 Sodium hydroxide (caustic soda); potassium hydrox ide (caustic potash); peroxides of sodium or 
potassium.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 350 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
2816 Hydroxide and peroxide of magnes ium; oxides, hydroxides and peroxides, of strontium or barium.  
2817 
00 000 0  Zinc oxide; zinc peroxide.  
2818 Artificial corundum, whether or not chemically defined; aluminium oxide; aluminium hydroxide.  
2819 Chromium oxides and hydroxides.  
2820 Manganese oxides.  
2821 Iron oxides and hydroxides; eart h colours containing 70% or more  by weight of combined iron 
evaluated as Fe 2O3. 
2822 00 000 0
 Cobalt oxides and hydroxides; technical cobalt oxides.  
2823 00 000 0
 Titanium oxides.  
2824 Lead oxides; red lead and orange lead.  
2825 Hydrazine and hydroxylamine and their inorganic sa lts; other inorganic base s; other metal oxides, 
hydroxides and peroxides.  
2826 Fluorides; fluorosilicates, fluoroamin ates and other complex fluorine salts.  
2827 Chlorides, chloride oxides and chloride hydrox ides; bromides and bromide oxides; iodides and 
iodide oxides.  
2828 Hypochlorites; commercial calcium hy pochlorite; chlorite s; hypobromites.  
2829 Chlorates and perchlorates; bromates an d perbromates; iodates and periodates.  
2830 Sulphides; polysulphides whether or not chemically defined.  
2831 Dithionites and sulphoxylates.  
2832 Sulphites; thiosulphates.  
2833 Sulphates; alums; peroxosulpohates (persulphates).  
2834 Nitrites; nitrates.  
2835 Phosphinates (hypophosphites), phosphonates (phosphites), phosphates and polyphosphates 
whether or not chemically defined.  
2836 Carbonates; peroxocarbonates (percarbonates);  commercial ammonium carbonate containing 
ammonium carbamate.  
2837 Cyanides, cyanide oxides, and complex cyanides.  
2839 Silicates; commercial alkali metal silicates.  
2840 Borates; peroxoborates (perborates).  
2841 Salts of oxometallic or peroxometallic acids.  
2842 Other salts of inorganic acids or peroxacids (including aluminosilicates whether or not chemically 
defined), other than azides.  
2843 Colloidal precious metals; inorganic or organic compounds of precious metals, whether or not 
chemically defined; amalgams of precious metals.  
2844 Radioactive chemical elements and radioactive isotopes (including the fissile or fertile chemical elements and isotopes) and their compounds; mixtures and residues containing these products.
 
2845 Isotopes other than those of Heading 2844; compounds, inorganic or organic, of such isotopes, whether or not chemically defined.
 
2846 Compounds, inorganic or organic, of rare-earth meta ls, of yttrium or of scandium or of mixtures of 
these metals.  
2847 00 000 0
 Urea hydrogen peroxide or non-urea hydrogen peroxide  
2848 00 000 0
 Phosphides of defined or undefined chemical  composition, except for ferrophosphorus.  
2849 Carbides, whether or not chemically defined.  
2850 00  Hydrides, nitrides, azides, silicides, borides, of defined or undefined chemical composition, except 
for chemical compounds which are carbides under HS code 2849.  
2852 00 000
 Mercuric compounds, inorganic or orga nic compounds, except for amalgams.  
2853 00  Other inorganic compounds (including distilled or conductivity water and water of the same 
cleanness); liquid air with or without inactive gas); compressed air; amalgams, except for precious metals amalgams.
 
2901 Acyclic hydrocarbons.  
2902 Cyclic hydrocarbons.  
2903 Halogenated derivatives of hydrocarbons.  
2904 Sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivative s of hydrocarbons, whether or not halogenated.  
2905 Acyclic alcohols and their halogented, sulpho nated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2906 Cyclic alcohols and their halogenated, sulpho nated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2907 Phenols; phenol-alcohols.  
2908 Halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosat ed derivatives of phenols or phenol-alcohols.  
2909 Ethers, ether-alcohols, ether phenols, ether-alcoho l-phenols, alcohol peroxi des, ether peroxides, 
ketone peroxides (whether or not chemically defined), and their halo genated, sulphonated, 
nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 351 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
2910 Epoxides, epoxyalcohols, epoxyphenols, and epoxy ethers, with a three-member ring and their 
halogented, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2911 00 000 0
 Acetals and semiacetals containing  or not containing other acid-containing functional group and 
their halogenated, sulfonated, nitrated or nitrozated derivatives.  
2912 Aldehydes, whether or not with other oxygen  function; cyclic polymers of aldehydes; 
paraformaldehyde.  
2913 00 000 0
 Halogented, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives of compounds under HS code 2912.  
2914 Ketones and quinones, whether or not with other oxygen function, and their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
 
2915 Saturated acyclic monocarboxylic acids and their anhydrides, halides, peroxides and peroxyacids; 
their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2916 Unsaturated acyclic monocarboxylic acids, cyclic  monocarbolic acids, their anhydrides, halides, 
peroxides, and peroxyacids; their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2917 Polycarboxylic acids, their anhydrides, halides,  peroxides and peroxyacids; their halogenated, 
sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2918 Carboxylic acids with additional  oxygen function and their a nhydrides, halides , peroxides and 
peoxyacids; their halogenated, sulphonate d, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2919 Phosphoric esters and their salts, including lactophosphates; their halogenated, sulphonated, 
nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2920 Esters of other inorganic acids (excluding este rs of hydrogen halides) and their salts; their 
halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2921 Amine-function compounds.  
2922 Oxygen-function amino-compounds.  
2923 Quaternary ammonium salts and hydroxides ; lecithins and other phosphoaminolipids.  
2924 Carboxyamide-function compounds; amide- function compounds of carbonic acid.  
2925 Carboxyimide-function compounds (including sa ccharin and its salts) and imine-function 
compounds.  
2926 Nitrile-function compounds.  
2927 00 000 0
 Diazo-, azo- or azoxy compounds.  
2928 00  Organic hydrazine or hydroxylamine derivatives.  
2929 Compounds with other nitrogen function.  
2930 Organo-sulphur compounds.  
2931 00  Other organic-inorganic compounds.  
2932 Heterocyclic compounds with oxygen hetero-atom(s) only.  
2933 Heterocyclic compounds with nitrogen hetero-atom(s) only.  
2934 Nucleic acids and their salts whether or not chemically defined; other heterocyclic compounds.  
2935 00  Sulfonamides.  
2936 Provitamins and vitamins, natural or reproduced by synthesis (including natural concentrates), 
derivatives thereof used primarily as vitamins, an d intermixtures of the fo regoing, whether or not 
in any solvent.  
2937 Hormones, prostaglandins, thromboxanes and leukot rienes, natural or repr oduced by synthesis; 
derivatives and structural analogues thereof, incl uding chain modified polypeptides, used primarily 
as hormones.  
2938 Glycosides, natural or reproduced by synthesi s and their salts, ethe rs, esters and other 
derivatives.  
2939 Vegetable alkaloids, natural or reproduced by sy nthesis and their salts, ethers, esters and other 
derivatives.  
2940 00 000 0
 Chemically clean sugars, except for saccharose, la ctose, maltose, glucose,  fructose; su gar ethers, 
sugar acetals, sugar esters, their salts, except for products under HS codes 2937, 2938 or 2939.  
2941 Antibiotics.  
2942 00 000 0
 Other organic compounds.  
3001 Glands and other organs for organo-therapeutic us es, dried, whether or not powdered; extracts of 
glands or other organs or of their secretions fo r organo-therapeutic uses; heparin and its salts; 
other human or animal substances  prepared for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, not elsewhere 
specified or included.  
3002 Human blood; animal blood prepared for therapeuti c, prophylactic or diagnostic uses; antisera 
and other blood fractions and modified immunolo gical products, whether or not obtained by 
means of biotechnological processes; vaccines, to xins, cultures of micro organisms (excluding 
yeasts) and similar products.  
3003 Medicaments (excluding goods of Headings 3002, 3005 or 3006) consisting of two or more constituents which have been mixed together for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, not put up in measures doses or in forms or packings for retail sale.
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 352 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
3004 Medicaments (excluding goods of Heading 3002, 3005 or 3006) consisting of mixed or unmixed 
products for therapeutic or prophy lactic uses, put up in measured doses (including those in the 
form of transdermal administration systems)  or in forms or packings for retail sale.  
3005 Wadding, gauze, bandages and similar articles (for example, dressings, adhesive plasters, 
poultices),impregnated or coated with pharmaceutical substances or put up in forms or packings 
for retail trade for medical, surgic al, dental or veterinary purposes.  
3006 Pharmaceutical goods specified in Note 4 to this Chapter.  
3202 Synthetic organic tanning substances; inorgani c tanning substances; tanning preparations, 
whether or not containing natural tanning subs tances; enzymatic preparations for pre-tanning.  
3204 Synthetic organic colouring matter, whether or not chemically defined; preparations as specified 
in Note 3 to this Chapter based on synthetic or ganic colouring matter; sy nthetic organic products 
of a kind used as fluorescent brightening agents  or as luminophores, wh ether or not chemically 
defined. –synthetic organic colouring matter an d preparations based thereon as specified in 
Note 3 to this Chapter.  
3209 Paints and varnishes (including enamels and lacquers) based on synthetic polymers or chemically modified natural polymers, dispersed or dissolved in an aqueous medium.
 
3215 Printing ink, writing or drawing ink, and other inks, whether or not concentrated or solid.  
3302 Mixtures of odoriferous substances and mixtures (i ncluding alcoholic solutions) with a basis of one 
or more of these substances, of a kind used as  raw materials in industry; other preparations 
based on odoriferous substances, of a kind  used for the manufacture of beverages.  
3307 Pre-shave, shaving or after-shave preparatio ns, personal deodorants, bath preparations, 
depilatories and other perfumery,  cosmetic or toilet preparatio ns, not elsewhere specified or 
included; prepared room deodorizers, whether or not perfumed or having disinfectant properties.  
3401 Soap, organic surface-active products and preparat ions for use as soap, in the form of bars, 
cakes, moulded pieces or shapes, whether or no t containing soap; organic surface-active agents 
and washing preparations for leather in the form of liquid or cream, in packings for retail sale, 
whether or not containing soap; paper, wadding,  felt and nonwovens, impregnated, coated or 
covered with soap or detergent.  
3402 Organic surface-active agents (other than soap); surface-active preparations, washing 
preparations (including auxiliary washing preparat ions) and cleaning preparations, whether or not 
containing soap, other than those of Heading 3401.  
3507 Enzymes; prepared enzymes not el sewhere specified or included.  
3602 00 
000 0 Finished explosives, except for gunpowder.  
3603 00  Safety fuses, detonating cords, percussion or detonating caps, igniters, detonators.  
3805 Gum, wood or sulphate turpentine  and other terpenic oils produced by the distillation or other 
treatment of coniferous woods; crude dipenten e; sulphite turpentine  and other crude para-
cymene; pine oil containing alpha-terpineol as the main constituent.  
3806 Rosin and resin acids, and de rivatives thereof; rosin spir it and rosin oils; run gums.  
3808 Insecticides, rodenticides, fungicides, herbicides, anti-sprouting products and plant-growth 
regulators, disinf ectants and similar products, put up in fo rms or packings for retail sale or as 
preparations or articles (for ex ample, sulphur-treated bands, wi cks and candles, and fly-papers).  
3901 Polymers of ethylene, in primary forms.  
3902 Polymers of propylene or of ot her olefins, in primary forms.  
3903 Polymers of styrene, in primary forms.  
3904 Polymers of vinyl chloride or of othe r halogenated olefins, in primary forms.  
3905 Polymers of vinyl acetate or of other vinyl este rs, in primary forms; other vinyl polymers in 
primary forms.  
3906 Acrylic polymers in primary forms.  
3907 Polyacetals, other polyet hers and epoxide resins, in primary forms; polycarbonates, alkyd resins, 
polyallyl esters and other po lyesters, in primary forms.  
3908 Polyamides in primary forms.  
3909 Amino-resins, phenolic resins, and polyurethanes, in primary forms.  
3911 Petroleum resins, coumarone-indene resins, polyte rpenes, polysulphides, polysulphones and other 
products specified in Note 3 to this Chapter, not elsewhere specified or included, in primary forms.  
3912 Cellulose and its chemical derivatives, not elsewhere specified or included, in primary forms.  
3913 Natural polymers (for example, alginic acid) and modified natural po lymers (for example, 
hardened proteins, chemical derivatives of natural rubber), not elsewhere specified or included, in 
primary forms.  
3914 00 000 0
 Ion-exchange resins, extracted from polymers under HS code 3901-3913, in primary forms.  
3915 Waste, parings and scrap, of plastics.  
3916 Monofilament of which any cross-sectional dime nsion exceeds 1 mm, rods, sticks and profile 
shapes, whether or not surface-worked bu t not otherwise worked, of plastics.  
3917 Tubes, pipes, and hoses, and fittings therefore (for example, joints, elbows, flanges), of plastics.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 353 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
3918 Floor coverings of polymer materials, whether or not self-adhesive, in rolls or in the form of tiles; 
wall or ceiling coverings of polymers, as defined in Note 9 to this Chapter.  
3919 Self-adhesive plates, sheets, film, foil, tape, stri p and other flat shapes, of polymer materials, 
whether or not in rolls.  
3920 Other plates, sheets, film, foil an d strip, of polymer materials, non-cellular and not reinforced, 
laminated, supported or similarl y combined with other materials.  
3921 Other plates, sheets, film, foil an d strip, of polymer materials.  
3922 Baths, shower-baths, wash-basins, bidets, lavatory pans, seats and covers, flushing cisterns and 
similar sanitary wa re, of plastics.  
3923 Articles for the conveyance or packing of good s, of plastics; stoppers , lids, caps and other 
closures, of plastics.  
3924 Tableware, kitchenware, other household ar ticles and toilet articles, of plastics.  
3925 Builders' ware of plastics, not elsewhere specified or included.  
3926 Other articles of plastics and articles of other materials of Headings 3901 to 3914.  
4001 Natural rubber, balata, gutta-percha, guayule, ch icle and similar natural gums, in primary forms 
or in plates, sheets or strip.  
4011 New pneumatic tyres, of rubber.  
4104 Leather or leather crust of bovine (including buffa lo), or equine animals, without hair on, whether 
or not split, but not further prepared.  
4202 Trunks, suit-cases, vanity-cases, executive-cases, brief-cases, school satchels, spectacle cases, 
binocular cases, camera cases, musical instrument cases, gun cases, holsters and similar containers; travelling-bags, toilet  bags, rucksacks, handbags, sh opping-bags, wallets, purses, 
map-cases, cigarette-cases, tobacco-pouches, to ol bags, sports bags, bottle-cases, jewellery 
boxes, powder-boxes, cutlery cases and similar contai ners, of leather or of composition leather, of 
sheeting of polymer or textile mate rials, of vulcanized fibre or of paperboard, or wholly or mainly 
covered with such materials or with paper.
 
4303 Articles of apparel, clothing accesso ries and other articles of fur skin.  
4410 Particle board, oriented strand board (OSB) and similar board (for example, waferboard) of wood 
or other ligneous materials, whether or not aggl omerated with resins or other organic binding 
substances.  
4411 Fibreboard of wood or other ligneous materials,  whether or not bonded with resins or other 
organic substances.  
4412 Plywood, veneered panels and similar laminated wood.  
4418 Builders' joinery and carpentry of wood, including cellular wood panels, a ssembled parquet panels, 
shingles and shakes.  
4801 00 000 0
 Newsprint paper rolled or in sheets  
4803 00  Paper napkins or face napkins, paper towels or paper diapers and other kinds of paper for 
household or sanitary-hygienic purp oses, cellulose cotton and sheet of cellulos e fibre, full-creped 
or not creped, corrugated or not corrugated, embossed or not embossed, perforated or not 
perforated, with coloured or uncoloured surfac e, printed or unprinted, in rolls or sheets.  
4808 Paper and paperboard, corrugated (with or without glued flat surface sheets), creped, crinkled, 
embossed or perforated, in rolls or sheets, othe r than paper of the kind described in Heading 
4803. 
4814 Wallpaper and similar wall coverings;  window transparencies of paper.  
4818 Toilet paper and similar paper, ce llulose wadding or webs of cellulose fibres, of a kind used for 
household or sanitary purposes, in rolls of a widt h not exceeding 36 cm, or cut to size or shape; 
handkerchiefs, cleansing tissues, towels, tablecloths, serviettes, napkins for babies, tampons, bed sheets and similar household, sa nitary or hospital articles, ar ticles of apparel and clothing 
accessories, of paper pulp, paper, cellulos e wadding or webs of  cellulose fibres.
 
4819 Cartons, boxes, cases, bags and other packing containers, of paper, paperboard, cellulose wading 
or webs of cellulose fibres; box files, letter trays,  and similar articles, of paper or paperboard, of a 
kind used in offices, shops or the like.  
4820 Registers, account books, note books, order b ooks, receipt books, le tter pads, memorandum 
pads, diaries and similar articles, exercise-books,  blotting pads, binders (loose-leaf or other), 
folders, file covers, manifold business forms, interleaved carbon sets and other articles of 
stationery, of paper or paperboard; albums for samples or for collections and book covers, of 
paper or paperboard.  
5001 00 000 0
 Silk cocoon, good for reeling  
5002 00 000 0
 (Thrown) raw silk  
5003 00 000 0
 Silk wastes (including cocoons, not good for r eeling, cocoon thread wastes and unravelled raw 
silk) 
5004 00  Silk thread (except for yarn from silk  wastes), not packed for retail sale.  
5005 00  Yarn from silk wastes, no t packed for retail sale.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 354 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
5006 00  Silk thread and yarn from silk wastes, packed for retail sale, fibre from silk moth fibroin  
5007 Woven fabrics of silk or of silk waste.  
5101 Wool, not carded or combed.  
5102 Fine or coarse animal hair, not carded or combed.  
5103 Waste of wool or of fine or coarse animal hair , including yarn waste but excluding garnetted stock.  
5104 
00 000 0  Unravelled wool or fine or coarse animal hair  
5105 Wool and fine or coarse animal hair, carded or  combed (including combed wool in fragments).  
5106 Yarn of carded wool, not put up for retail sale.  
5107 Yarn of combed wool, not put up for retail sale.  
5108 Yarn of fine animal hair (carded or combed), not put up for retail sale.  
5109 Yarn of wool or of fine animal hair, put up for retail sale.  
5110 00 
000 0 Yarn of coarse animal hair or horse hair (inclu ding gimp thread from horse hair), packed or not 
packed for retail sale.  
5111 Woven fabrics of carded wool or of carded fine animal hair.  
5112 Woven fabrics of combed wool or of combed fine animal hair.  
5113 00 000 0
 Fabric from coarse animal hair or horse hair  
5201 00  Cotton fibre, not carded or combed  
5202 Cotton waste (including yarn waste and garnetted stock).  
5203 00 
000 0 Cotton fibre, carded or combed  
5204 Cotton sewing thread, whether or  not put up for retail sale.  
5205 Cotton yarn (other than sewing thread), containing  85% or more by weight  of cotton, not put up 
for retail sale.  
5206 Cotton yarn (other than sewing thread), containing less than 85% by weight of cotton, not put up for retail sale.
 
5207 Cotton yarn (other than sewing thread) put up for retail sale.  
5208 Woven fabrics of cotton containing 85% or more by weight of cotton, weighing not more than 
200 g/m2. 
5209 Woven fabrics of cotton containing 85% or more  by weight of cotton, weighing more than 
200 g/m2. 
5210 Woven fabrics of cotton, containing less than 85% by weight of cotton, mixed mainly or solely with man-made fibres, weighing not more than 200 g/m
2. 
5211 Woven fabrics of cotton, containing less than 85% by weight of cotton, mixed mainly or solely with man-made fibres, weighing more than 200 g/m
2. 
5212 Other woven fabrics of cotton.  
5301 Flax, raw or processed but not spun; flax tow and waste (including yarn waste and garnetted 
stock).  
5302 True hemp (Cannabis sativa L.), raw or proces sed but not spun; tow and waste of true hemp 
(including yarn waste and garnetted stock).  
5303 Jute and other textile bast fibres (excluding flax , true hemp and ramie), raw or processed but not 
spun; tow and waste of these fibres (inc luding yarn waste and garnetted stock).  
5305 00 
000 0 Fibre of coconut, abacus ( Musa textilis Nee ), rami and other plant textile fibres, not named or not 
included under other tariff lines,  raw or processed, but not spinned; combings and wastes from 
these fibres (including spinning wastes and unravelled raw fibres)   
5306 Flax yarn.  
5307 Yarn of jute or of other textile bast fibres of Heading 5303.  
5308 Yarn of other vegetable te xtile fibres; paper yarn.  
5309 Woven fabrics of flax.  
5310 Woven fabrics of jute or of other textile bast fibres of Heading 5303.  
5311 00  Fabrics of other plant textile fibres; fabrics of spun cotton  
5401 Sewing thread of man-made filaments, whether or not put up for retail sale.  
5402 Synthetic filament yarn (other th an sewing thread), not put up fo r retail sale, including synthetic 
monofilament of less than 67 decitex.  
5403 Artificial filament yarn (other than sewing thread ), not put up for retail sale, including artificial 
monofilament of less than 67 decitex.  
5404 Synthetic monofilament of 67 decitex or more and of which no cross– sectional dimension exceeds 
1 mm; strip and the like (for example, artificial stra w) of synthetic textile ma terials of an apparent 
width not exceeding 5 mm.  
5405 00 000 0
 Monofilament of 67 decitex or mo re and of which no cross– sectional dimension exceeds 1 mm; 
strip and the like (for example, ar tificial straw) of artificial text ile materials of an apparent width 
not exceeding 5 mm.  
5406 00 
000 0 Chemical filament yarn (except for sewi ng threads), packed for retail sale.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 355 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
5407 Woven fabrics of synthetic filament yarn, incl uding woven fabrics obtained from materials of 
Heading 5404.  
5408 Woven fabrics of artificial filament yarn, incl uding woven fabrics obtained from materials of 
Heading 5405.  
5501 Synthetic filament tow.  
5502 00  Man-made filament tow.  
5503 Synthetic staple fibres, not carded, comb ed or otherwise processed for spinning.  
5504 Artificial staple fibres, not carded, comb ed or otherwise processed for spinning.  
5505 Waste (including noils, yarn waste and garnetted stock) of man-made fibres.  
5506 Synthetic staple fibres, carded, combed  or otherwise processed for spinning.  
5507 00 
000 0 Man-made fibres, carded, combed or processed differently for spinning.  
5508 Sewing thread of man-made staple fibres , whether or not put up for retail sale.  
5509 Yarn (other than sewing thre ad) of synthetic staple fibres , not put up for retail sale.  
5510 Yarn (other than sewing thread) of artifici al staple fibres, not put up for retail sale.  
5511 Yarn (other than sewing thread) of man-ma de staple fibres, put up for retail sale.  
5512 Woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres, containi ng 85% or more by weig ht of synthetic staple 
fibres. 
5513 Woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres, containing  less than 85% by weight of such fibres, mixed 
mainly or solely with cotton, of a weight not exceeding 170 g/m2. 
5514 Woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres, containing  less than 85% by weight of such fibres, mixed 
mainly or solely with cotton, of a weight exceeding 170 g/m2. 
5515 Other woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres.  
5516 Woven fabrics of artificial staple fibres.  
5601 Wadding of textile materials and articles thereo f; textile fibres, not exceeding 5 mm in length 
(flock), textile dust and mill neps.  
5602 Felt, whether or not impregnated, coated, covered or laminated.  
5603 Nonwovens, whether or not impregna ted, coated, covered or laminated.  
5604 Rubber thread and cord, textile covered; textile yarn and strip and the like of Heading 5404 or 
5405, impregnated, coated, covered or sheathed with rubber or plastics.  
5605 00 0  Gimped or not gimped metallic thread, which is a te xtile thread or flat or similar thread under HS 
codes 5404 or 5405, mixed with metal in the form of a thread, plate or powder, or covered with metal.
 
5606 00  Thread gimped and flat and similar thread un der HS codes 5404 or 5405, gimped thread (except 
for thread under HS code 5605 and gimped thread  from horse hair); chen ille yarn (including 
flocked chenille); fancy loop yarn.  
5607 Twine, cordage, ropes and cables, whether or  not plaited or braided and whether or not 
impregnated, coated, covered or sh eathed with rubber or plastics.  
5608 Knotted netting of twine, cordage of rope; made up  fishing nets and other ma de up nets, of textile 
materials.  
5609 00 000 0
 Products from threads or yarn, flat or simila r threads under HS codes 5404 or 5405, twine, 
cordage of rope, not named or not included under other tariff lines.  
5701 Carpets and other textile floor covering s, knotted, whether or not made up.  
5702 Carpets and other textile floor coverings, woven, not tufted or flocked, whether or not made up, 
including "Kelem", "Schumacks", "Kar amanie" and similar hand-woven rugs.  
5703 Carpets and other textile floor coverings, tufted, whether or not made up.  
5704 Carpets and other textile floor coverings, of felt, not tufted or flocked, whether or not made up.  
5705 00  Carpets and other textile floor cove rings, whether or not made up.  
5801 Woven pile fabrics and chenille fabrics, other than fabrics of Heading 5802 or 5806.  
5802 Terry towelling and similar woven terry fabrics, ot her than narrow fabrics of Heading 5806; tufted 
textile fabrics, other than products of Heading 5703.  
5803 00  Leno fabrics, except for narrow fabrics under HS code 5806.  
5804 Tulles and other net fabrics, not including woven, knitted or crocheted fabrics; lace in the piece, in strips or in motifs, other than fabrics of Headings 6002– 6006.
 
5805 00 000 0
 Hand-made tapestry similar to Belgian, Aubusson,  Beauvais or similar ta pestry and embroidered 
tapestry (for example, cross-stitched or satin-stitched), whether or not made up.  
5806 Narrow woven fabrics, other than goods of Heading 5807; narrow fabrics consisting of warp 
without weft assembled by means of an adhesive (bolducs).  
5807 Labels, badges, and similar articles of textile materials, in the piece,  in strips or cut to shape or 
size, not embroidered.  
5808 Braids in the piece; ornamental trimmings in the piece, without embroidery, other than knitted or crocheted; tassels, pompons and similar articles.
 
5810 Embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs.  
5811 00 
000 0 Quilted textile fabrics in piece, consisting of one or a few layers of textil e materials, sewed with a 
soft layer or connected in another way, except for embroidery under HS code 5810.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 356 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
5901 Textile fabrics coated with gum or  amylaceous substances, of a kind  used for the outer covers of 
books or the like; tracing cloth; prepared painti ng canvas; buckram and similar stiffened textile 
fabrics of a kind used for hat foundations.  
5902 Tyre cord fabric of high-tenacity yarn of nylon or other polyamides, poly esters or viscose rayon.  
5903 Textile fabrics impregnated, coat ed, covered or laminated with plastics, other than those of 
Heading 5902.  
5904 Linoleum, whether or not cut to shape; floor coveri ngs consisting of a coating or covering applied 
to a textile backing, whether or not cut to shape.  
5905 00  Wall carpets from textile products  
5906 Rubberized textile fabrics, other than those of Heading 5902.  
5907 00  Textile products saturated or covered in anothe r way; painted fabrics fo r theatrical scenery, 
background scenery for art studios or similar fabrics.  
5908 00 000 0
 Textile wicks, woven, braided or knitted for lamps, oil cooking stoves, lighters, candles or similar products; gas mantle and tubular textile fabr ic for gas mantles, coated or not coated
 
5909 00  Textile hoses and similar textile tubes with pads, trimming or accessories from other materials or 
without thereof  
5910 00 000 0
 Conveyor belt or drive belt or belting from textile materials, coat ed or not coated, covered or not 
covered, laminated  with plastics or not laminated, or armoured with metal or other material  
5911 Textile products and articles, for technical uses, specified in Note 7 to this Chapter.  
6001 Pile fabrics, including "long-pile" fabric s and terry fabrics, knitted or crocheted.  
6002 Knitted or crocheted fabric s, of a width not exceeding 30 cm, containing by weight 5% or more of 
elastomeric yarn or rubber thread, other than fabrics of Heading 6001.  
6003 Knitted or crocheted fabrics, of a width not exceeding 30 cm, other than fabrics of Headings 6001 or 6002.
 
6004 Knitted or crocheted fabric s, of a width not exceeding 30 cm, containing by weight 5% or more of 
elastomeric yarn or rubber thread, other than fabrics of Heading 6001.  
6005 Raschel lace (including crocheted fabrics for manufacture of lace), other than fabrics of 
Headings 6001– 6004.  
6006 Other knitted or crocheted fabrics.  
6101 Men's or boys' overcoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks , anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-cheaters, 
wind-jackets and similar articles, knitted or crocheted, other than those of Heading 6103.  
6102 Women's or girls' overcoats, car-coats, cape s, cloaks, anoraks (including ski-jackets), 
wind-cheaters, wind-jackets and similar articles, knitted or crocheted, other than those of Heading 6104.
 
6103 Men's or boys' suits, ensembles, jackets, blazer s, trousers, bib and brac e overalls, breeches and 
shorts (other than swimwear), knitted or crocheted.  
6104 Women's or girls' suits, ensembles, jackets, blaze rs, dresses, skirts, divided skirts, trousers, bib- 
and-brace overalls, breeches and shorts (other than swim wear), knitted or crocheted.  
6105 Men's or boys' shirts, knitted or crocheted.  
6106 Women's or girls' blouses, shirts, and shirt– blouses, knitted or crocheted.  
6107 Men's or boys' underpants, briefs, nightshirts, pyjamas, bathrobes, dressing gowns and similar 
articles, knitted or crocheted.  
6108 Women's or girls' slips, petticoats, briefs, pant ies, nightdresses, pyjama s, negliges, bathrobes, 
dressing gowns and similar ar ticles, knitted or crocheted.  
6109 T–shirts, singlets and other vests, knitted or crocheted.  
6110 Jerseys, pullovers, cardigans, waistcoats and similar articles, knitted or crocheted.  
6111 Babies' garments and clothing a ccessories, knitted or crocheted.  
6112 Track suits, ski suits and swimwear, knitted or crocheted.  
6113 00  Clothes from textile machine or hand-knitted fabric  
6114 Other garments, knitted or crocheted.  
6115 Pantyhose, tights, stockings, socks and other ho siery, including graduated compression hosiery 
(for example, stockings for varicose veins) an d footwear without appl ied soles, knitted or 
crocheted.  
6116 Gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted, or crocheted.  
6117 Other made up clothing accessories, knitted or cr ocheted; knitted or croc heted parts of garments 
or of clothing accessories.  
6201 Men's or boys' overcoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks , anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-cheaters, 
wind-jackets and similar articles, other than those of Heading 6203.  
6202 Women's or girls' overcoats, car-coats, capes,  cloaks, anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-
cheaters, wind-jackets and similar articles, other than those of Heading 6204.  
6203 Men's or boys' suits, ensembles, jackets, blazer s, trousers, bib and brac e overalls, breeches and 
shorts (other than swimwear).  
6204 Women's or girls' suits, ensembles, jackets, blaze rs, dresses, skirts, divided skirts, trousers, bib 
and brace overalls, breeches and shorts (other than swimwear).  
6205 Men's and boys' shirts.  
6206 Women's or girls' blouses, shirts and shirt-blouses.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 357 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
6207 Men's or boys' singlets and other vests, underp ants, briefs, nightshirts,  pyjamas, bathrobes, 
dressing gowns and similar articles.  
6208 Women's and girls' singlets and other vests, sl ips, petticoats, briefs, panties, nightdresses, 
pyjamas, negliges, bathrobes, dres sing gowns and similar articles.  
6209 Babies' garments and clothing accessories.  
6210 Garments, made up of fabrics of Headings 5602, 5603, 5903, 5906 or 5907.  
6211 Track suits, ski suits and swimwear; other garments.  
6212 Brassieres, girdles, corsets, braces, suspenders, garters and similar articles and parts thereof, 
whether or not knitted or crocheted.  
6213 Handkerchiefs.  
6214 Shawls, scarves, mufflers, mantillas, veils and the like.  
6215 Ties, bow ties and cravats.  
6216 00 000 0
 Gloves and mittens.  
6217 Other made-up clothing accessories ; parts of garments or of clothing accessories, other than 
those of Heading 6212.  
6301 Blankets and travelling rugs.  
6302 Bed linen, table linen, toilet linen and kitchen linen.  
6303 Curtains (including drapes) and interi or blinds; curtain or bed valances.  
6304 Other furnishing articles excluding those of Heading 9404.  
6305 Sacks and bags, of a kind used for the packing goods.  
6306 Tarpaulins, awnings and sunblinds; tents; sails fo r boats, sailboards or landcraft; camping goods.  
6307 Other made-up articles, in cluding dre ss patterns.  
6308 
00 000 0  Sets of fabrics and yarn or threads with accesso ries or without thereof,  for carpets, tapestry, 
embroidered table clothes or na pkins or similar textile products, packed for retail sale.  
6309 
00 000 0  Used clothes and other used products  
6310 Used or new rags, scrap twine, cordage, rope and cables and worn out articles of twine, cordage, 
rope or cables, of textile materials.  
6403 Footwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leat her or composition leather and uppers of leather.  
6404 Footwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leat her or composition leather and uppers of textile 
materials.  
6405 Other footwear.  
6806 Slag wool, rock wool and similar mineral wools; exfoliated vermiculite, expanded clays, foamed 
slag and similar expanded mineral materials; mixtures and articles of heat-insulating, 
sound-insulating or sound-absorbing mineral materi als, other than those of Heading 6811 or 6812 
or of Chapter 69.  
6907 Unglazed ceramic flags and paving, hearth or wall tiles; unglazed ceramic mosaic cubes and the like, whether or not on a backing.
 
6908 Glazed ceramic flags and paving, hearth or wall ti les; glazed ceramic mosaic cubes and the like, 
whether or not on a backing.  
6909 Ceramic wares for laboratory, chemical or other te chnical uses; ceramic troughs, tubs and similar 
receptacles of kind used in agriculture; ceramic po ts, jars and similar articl es of kind used for the 
conveyance or packing of goods. ceramic wares  for laboratory, chemical or other technical uses.  
6910 Ceramic sinks, wash basins, wash basin pedestals, baths, bidets, water closet pans, flushing 
cisterns, urinals and similar sanitary fixtures.  
6911 Tableware, kitchenware, other household articles  and toilet articles, of porcelain or china.  
7005 Float glass and surface ground or polished glass, in sheets, whether or not having an absorbent, 
reflecting or non-reflecting la yer, but not otherwise worked.  
7009 Glass mirrors, whether or not frame d, including rear-view mirrors.  
7010 Carboys, bottles, flasks, jars, pots, phials, ampoules  and other containers, of glass, of a kind used 
for the conveyance or packing of goods; preser ving jars of glass; st oppers, lids and other 
closures, of glass.  
7013 Glassware of a kind used for table, kitchen, toil et, office, indoor decorati on or similar purposes 
(other than that of Heading 7010 or 7018).  
7016 Paving blocks, slabs, bricks, squares, tiles and ot her articles of pressed or  moulded glass, whether 
or not wired, of a kind used for building or co nstruction purposes; glass cubes and other glass 
small wares, whether or not on a backing, for mosaics or similar decora tive purposes; leaded 
lights and the like; multicellular or foam glass in  blocks, panels, plates, shells or similar forms.  
7019 Glass fibres (including glass wool) and articles  thereof (for example,  yarn, woven fabrics).  
7105 Dust and powder of natural or synthe tic precious or semi-precious stones.  
7204 Ferrous waste and scrap; remelting scrap ingots of iron or steel.  
7209 Flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, cold-rolled 
(cold-reduced), not clad, plated or coated.  
7210 Flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, clad, plated or coated.
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 358 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
7213 Bars and rods, hot-rolled, in irregularly wound coils, of iron or non-alloy steel.  
7214 Other bars and rods of iron or  non-alloy steel, not further worked than forged, hot-rolled, hot-
drawn or hot-extruded but including those twisted after rolling.  
7216 Angles, shapes, and sections of iron or non-alloy steel.  
7219 Flat-rolled products of stainless steel, of a width of 600 mm or more.  
7220 Flat-rolled products of stainless steel, of a width of less than 600 mm.  
7225 Flat-rolled products of other alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more.  
7227 Bars and rods, hot-rolled, in irregula rly wound coils, of other alloy steel.  
7228 Other bars and rods of other allo y steel; angles, shapes and sections, of other alloy steel; hollow 
drill bars and rods, of alloy or non-alloy steel.  
7303 00  Tubes, pipes and hollow pr ofiles, of iron casting.  
7304 Tubes, pipes and hollow profil es, seamless, of iron (other than cast iron) or steel.  
7305 Other tubes and pipes (for example, welded, ri veted or similarly closed), with circular 
cross-sections and external diameter of which exceeds 406.4 mm, of iron or steel.  
7306 Other tubes, pipes and hollow prof iles (for example, open seam or welded, riveted, or similarly 
closed), of iron or steel.  
7404 00  Copper wastes and scrabs.  
7408 Copper wire.  
7410 Copper foil (whether or not printed or backed with  paper, paperboard, plastics or similar backing 
materials) of a thickness (excluding any backing) not exceeding 0.15 mm.  
7606 Aluminium plates, sheets and strip, of a thickness exceeding 0.2 mm.  
7607 Aluminium foil (whether or not printed or backed  with paper, paperboard, plastics or similar 
backing materials), of a thickness (exclu ding any backing) not exceeding 0.2 mm.  
7608 Aluminium tubes and pipes.  
8104 Magnesium and articles thereof, including waste and scrap.  
8302 Base metal mountings, fittings and similar articl es suitable for furnitur e, doors, staircases, 
windows, blinds, coachwork, saddlery, trunks, ches ts, caskets or the like; base metal hat-racks, 
hat-pegs, brackets and si milar fixtures; castors with mountings of base metal; automatic door 
closers of base metal.  
8309 Stoppers, caps and lids (including crown corks, screw caps and pouring stoppers), capsules for 
bottles, threaded bungs, bung covers, seals, and other packing accessories, of base metal.  
8407 Spark-ignition reciprocating or rotary  internal combustion piston engines.  
8408 Compression-ignition, internal combustion piston engines (diesel or semi-diesel engines).  
8415 Air conditioning machines, comprising a moto r-driven fan and elements for changing the 
temperature and humidity, including those machin es in which humidity cannot be separately 
regulated.  
8418 Refrigerators, freezers and other refrigerating or freezing equipment, electric or other; heat 
pumps other than air conditioning machines of Heading 8415.  
8424 Mechanical appliances (whether or not hand-ope rated) for projecting, dispersing or spraying 
liquids or powders; fire extinguishers, whether or  not charged; spray guns  and similar appliances; 
steam or sand blasting machines and similar jet projecting machines.  
8428 Other lifting, handling, loading or unloading machin ery (for example, lifts, escalators, conveyors, 
teleferics).  
8432 Agricultural, horticultural or forestry machiner y for soil preparation or cultivation; lawn or 
sports-ground rollers.  
8433 Harvesting or threshing machinery, including straw or fodder balers; grass or hay mowers; 
machines for cleaning, sorting or grading eggs, fru it or other agricultural  produce, other than 
machinery of Heading 8437.  
8434 Milking machines and dairy machinery.  
8443 Printing machinery used for printi ng by means of plates, cylinders  and other printing components 
of Heading 8442; other printers, copying mach ines and facsimile machines, whether or not 
combined; parts and accessories thereof.  
8450 Household or laundry-type washing machines, in cluding machines which both wash and dry.  
8451 Machinery (other than machines of Heading 8450) for washing, cleaning, wringing, drying, 
ironing, pressing (including fusing presses), bl eaching, dyeing, dressing, finishing, coating or 
impregnating textile yarns, fabrics, or made up  textile articles and machines for applying the 
paste to the base fabric or other support used in the manufacture of floor coverings such as 
linoleum; machines for reeling, unreeling, fo lding, cutting or pi nking textile fabrics.  
8452 Sewing machines, other than book-sewing machines  of Heading 8440; furniture, bases and covers 
specially designed for sewing machines; sewing machine needles.  
8455 Metal-rolling mills and rolls therefore.  
8456 Machine-tools for working any materi al by removal of material, by laser or other light or photon 
beam, ultrasonic, electro-discharge, electro-chem ical, electron beam, io n-beam or plasma arc 
processes.  
8457 Machining centres, unit construction machines (single station) and multi-station transfer machines for working metal.
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 359 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
8458 Lathes (including turning ce ntres), for removing metal.  
8459 Machine-tools (including way-type unit head machines) for drilling, boring, milling, threading or 
tapping by removing metal, other than lathes  (including turning centres) of Heading 8458.  
8460 Machine-tools for deburring, sharpening, grinding, honing, lapping, polishing or otherwise finishing 
metal or cermets by means of gr inding stones, abrasives or polishing products, other than gear 
cutting, gear grinding or gear finishing machines of Heading 8461.  
8461 Machine-tools for planing, shaping, slotting, broa ching, gear cutting, gear grinding or gear 
finishing, sawing, cutting-off an d other machine-tools working by removing metal or  cermets, not 
elsewhere specified or included.  
8462 Machine-tools (including presse s) for working metal by forging, hammering or die-stamping; 
machine-tools (including presses) for working metal by bending, fold ing, straightening, flattening, 
shearing, punching or notching; presses for work ing metal or metal carbides, not specified above.  
8474 Machinery for sorting, washing, crushing, grinding, mixing or kneading earth, stone, ores or other 
mineral substances, in solid (including powder or paste) form; machin ery for agglomerating, 
shaping or moulding solid mineral fuels, ceramic paste, unhardened cements, plastering materials or other mineral products in powder or paste fo rm; machines for forming foundry moulds of sand.
 
8481 Taps, cocks, valves and similar app liances for pipes, boiler shells, tanks, vats or the like, including 
pressure-reducing valves and thermostatically controlled valves.  
8482 Ball or roller bearings.  
8501 Electric motors and generators  (excluding generating sets).  
8502 Electric generating sets and rotary converters.  
8504 Electrical transformers, static converters  (for example, rect ifiers) and inductors.  
8505 Electro-magnets; permanent magn ets and articles intended to become permanent magnets after 
magnetisation; electro-magnetic  or permanent magn et chucks, clamps and similar holding 
devices; electro-magnetic couplings, clutches and brakes; electro-magnetic lifting heads.  
8507 Electric accumulators, including separators ther efore, whether or not rectangular (including 
square).  
8508 Vacuum cleaners.  
8516 Electric instantaneous or storage water heaters and immersion heaters; electric space heating apparatus and soil heating apparatus; electro-ther mic hair-dressing apparatus (for example, hair 
dryers, hair curlers, curling tong heaters) an d hand dryers; electric smoothing irons; other 
electro-thermic appliances of a kind used for dome stic purposes; electric heating resistors, other 
than those of Heading 8545.
 
8517 Telephone sets, including telephones for cellular  networks or for other wireless networks; other 
apparatus for the transmission or reception of voic e, images or other data, including apparatus for 
communication in a wired or wireless network (suc h as a local or wide area network), other than 
transmission or reception apparatus of Heading 8443, 8525, 8527 or 8528.  
8519 Sound recording or sound reproducing apparatus.  
8521 Video recording or reproducing apparatus, whether or not incorporating a video tuner.  
8525 Transmission apparatus for radio-broadcasting or television, whether or not incorporating 
reception apparatus or sound recording or reprod ucing apparatus; televi sion cameras, digital 
cameras and video camera recorders.  
8528 Monitors and projectors, not inco rporating television reception ap paratus; reception apparatus for 
television, whether or not incorporating radio-broadcast receivers or sound or video recording or reproducing apparatus.
 
8529 Parts suitable for use solely or principally with the apparatus of Headings 8525 to 8528.  
8537 Boards, panels, consoles, desks, cabinets and ot her bases, equipped with two or more apparatus 
of Heading 8535 or 8536, for electric control or  distribution of electricity, including those 
incorporating instruments or apparatus of Chap ter 90, and numerical co ntrol apparatus, other 
than switching apparatus of Heading 8517.  
8539 Electric filament or discharge lamps, including sealed-beam lamp units and ultra-violet or infra-red lamps; arc-lamps.
 
8542 Electronic integrated circuits.  
8544 Insulated (including enamelled or  anodised) wire, cable (includi ng co-axial cable) and other 
insulated electric conductors, whether or not fitted  with connectors; optical fibre cables, made up 
of individually sheathed fibres, whether or not as sembled with electric cond uctors or fitted with 
connectors.  
8545 Carbon electrodes, carbon brushes, lamp carbons,  battery carbons and other articles of graphite 
or other carbon, with or without metal, of a kind used for electrical purposes.  
8603 Self-propelled railway or tramway coaches, vans and trucks, other than those of Heading 8604.  
8605 00 
000 Passenger non-self-propelled railway or tram ca rs; baggage, mail o other specialized railway or 
tram non-self-propelled cars (except for included under tariff lines 8604).  
8701 Tractors (other than tractors of Heading 8709).  
8702 Motor vehicles for the transport of ten or more persons, including the driver.  
8703 Motor cars and other motor vehicles principally de signed for the transport of persons (other than 
those of Heading 8702), including station wagons and racing cars.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 360 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
8704 Motor vehicles for the transport of goods.  
8705 Special purpose motor vehicles, other than those pr incipally designed for the transport of persons 
or goods (for example, breakdown lorries, crane lo rries, fire fighting ve hicles, concrete-mixer 
lorries, road-sweeper lorries, spraying lorries, mo bile workshops, mobile radiological units).  
8708 Parts and accessories of the motor vehicles of Headings 8701 to 8705.  
8716 Trailers and semi-trailers; other vehicles, not mechanically propelled; parts thereof.  
8802 Other aircraft (for exam ple, helicopters, aeroplanes); spac ecraft (including satellites) and 
suborbital and spacec raft launch vehicles.  
9001 Optical fibres and optical fibre bundles; optical fibre cables other than those of Heading 8544; 
sheets and plates of polarising material; lenses  (including contact lenses), prisms, mirrors and 
other optical elements, of any material, unmounted, other than such elements of glass not optically worked.
 
9003 Frames and mountings for spectacles, goggles or the like and parts thereof.  
9006 Photographic (other than cinematographic) ca meras; photographic flashlight apparatus and 
flashbulbs other than discharge lamps of Heading 8539.  
9013 Liquid-crystal devices not constituting articles pr ovided for more specifically in other headings; 
lasers, other than laser diodes; other optical appliances and instruments, not specified or included elsewhere in this Chapter.
 
9016 00  Weight scale with balance sensitivity of 0,05 grams or more, with weights or without thereof.  
9018 Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, othe r electro-medical apparatus an d sight-testing instruments.
 
9022 Apparatus based on the use of X-rays or of alph a, beta or gamma radiations, whether or not for 
medical, surgical, dental or ve terinary uses, including radiogra phy or radiotherapy apparatus, 
X-ray tubes and other X-ray generators, high-ten sion generators, control panels and desks, 
screens, examination or treatment tables, chairs  and the like.– apparatus based on the use of 
X-rays, whether or not fo r medical, surgical, dental or veteri nary uses, including radiography or 
radiotherapy apparatus.  
9025 Hydrometers and similar floating instrument s, thermometers, pyro meters, barometers, 
hygrometers and psychrometers, recording or not and any comb ination of these instruments.  
9028 Gas, liquid or electricity suppl y or production meters, includin g calibrating meters therefore.  
9401 Seats (other than those of Heading 9402), whether or not convertible into beds, and parts 
thereof.  
9402 Medical, surgical, dental or ve terinary furniture (for example,  operating tables, examination 
tables, hospital beds  with mechanical fittings, dentists' chairs); barbers' chairs and similar chairs, 
having rotating as well as both  reclining and elevating movements;  parts of the foregoing articles.  
9403 Other furniture and parts thereof.  
9406 00  Assembled building construction.  
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 361 - 
 
  ANNEX 8 
List of Developing Country Beneficiaries of the Tariff Preferences System of the Eurasian 
Economic Union 
1. Albania 
2. Algeria 
3. Anguilla 
4. Antigua and Barbuda 
5. Argentina 
6. Aruba 
7. The Bahamas 
8. Bahrain, Kingdom of 
9. Barbados 
10. Belize 
11. Bermuda 
12. Bolivia, Plurinational State of 
13. Bosnia and Herzegovina 
14. Botswana 
15. Brazil 
16. British Virgin Islands 
17. Brunei Darussalam 
18. Cameroon 
19. Cabo Verde 
20. Cayman Islands 
21. Chile 
22. China 
23. Colombia 
24. Cook Islands 
25. Costa Rica 
26. Côte d'Ivoire 
27. Croatia 
28. Cuba 
29. Democratic Republic of the Congo 
30. Dominica 
31. Dominican Republic 
32. Ecuador 
33. Egypt 
34. Fiji 
35. Gabon 
36. Ghana 
37. Grenada 
38. Guatemala 
39. Guyana 
40. Honduras 
41. Hong Kong, China 
42. India 
43. Indonesia 
44. Iran, Islamic Republic of 
45. Iraq 
46. Jamaica 
47. Jordan 
48. Kenya 
49. Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of 
50. Korea, Democratic People's Republic 
of 
51. Korea, Republic of 
52. Kuwait, the State of 
53. Lebanon  
54. Libya 
55. The former Yugoslav Republic of 
Macedonia (FYROM) 56. Malaysia 
57. Marshall Islands 
58. Mauritius 
59. Mexico 
60. Micronesia, Federative States of 
61. Mongolia 
62. Montenegro 
63. Montserrat 
64. Morocco 
65. Namibia 
66. Nauru, Republic of 
67. Nicaragua 
68. Nigeria 
69. Niue 
70. Oman 
71. Pakistan 
72. Panama 
73. Papua New Guinea 
74. Paraguay 
75. Peru 
76. Philippines 
77. Qatar 
78. Saint-Helena 
79. Salvador 
80. Serbia 
81. Seychelles, the Republic of 
82. Singapore 
83. South Africa 
84. Sri Lanka 
85. St. Kitts and Nevis 
86. St. Lucia 
87. St. Vincent and the Grenadines 
88. Suriname 
89. Swaziland 
90. Syria 
91. Thailand 
92. The Turks and Caicos Islands 
93. Tokelau 
94. Tonga 
95. Trinidad and Tobago 
96. Tunisia 
97. Turkey 
98. United Arab Emirates 
99. Uruguay 
100.  Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of  
101.  Viet Nam 
102.  Zimbabwe WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 362 - 
 
  ANNEX 9 
List of Least Developed Count ry Beneficiaries of the Tariff Preferences System of the 
Eurasian Economic Union 
1. Afghanistan, Islamic Republic of 
2. Angola, Republic of 
3. Bangladesh 
4. Benin, Republic of 
5. Bhutan 
6. Burkina Faso 
7. Burundi 
8. Cambodia 
9. Central African Republic 
10. Chad 
11. Comoros, Union of the 
12. Congo, Democratic Republic of 
13. Djibouti, Republic of 
14. Equatorial Guinea 
15. Eritrea 
16. Ethiopia   
17. The Gambia 
18. Guinea 
19. Guinea Bissau 
20. Haiti 
21. Kiribati, Republic of 
22. Lao People's Democratic Republic 
23. Lesotho 
24. Liberia 
25. Madagascar 
26. Malawi 
27. Maldives 
28. Mali 
29. Mauritania 
30. Mozambique 
31. Myanmar, Union of 
32. Nepal 
33. Niger 
34. Rwanda 
35. Samoa, Independent State of 
36. Sao Tomé and Principe  
37. Senegal, Republic of 
38. Sierra Leone 
39. Solomon Islands 
40. Somalia 
41. Sudan 
42. Tanzania 
43. Timor-Leste 
44. Togo 
45. Tuvalu 
46. Uganda 
47. Vanuatu 
48. Yemen, Republic of 
49. Zambia WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 363 - 
 
  ANNEX 10 
List of Goods Originating and Imported from  Developing and Least Developed Countries 
Subject to Tariff Preferences 
HS Code  Name of goods *  
02 Meat and meat by-products  
03 (except 0305)  Fish and shellfish, clams and other sea invertebrate animals (except for sturgeon 
and salmon fish, and their caviar)  
04 Milk products; birds eg gs; natural honey; foodstuffs of animal origin not named or 
included in other positions  
05 Foodstuffs of animal origin not na med or included in other positions  
06 Trees and other plants; bulb, roots and other parts of plants; cut flowers and 
decorative plants  
07 Vegetables and certain edible root and tuber crops  
08 Edible fruit and nuts; citr us peel or melon peel  
09 Coffee, tea, mate or Paraguayan tea, and spices  
1006 Rice 
11 Products of flour-and-cereals industry ; grist; farina; inulin; wheat gluten  
12 Olive seeds and fruits; other seeds, fruits and grain; herbs and plants for technical 
purposes; straw and forage  
13 Lac; gums, resins and other plant sap and extracts  
14 Plant materials for braiding; other produc ts of vegetable origin, not named or 
included in other positions  
15 (except 1509, 1517 – 1522 00)
 Fats and oils of animal or vegetable origin   and their split products; finished edible 
fats; waxes of animal or vegetable origin  
16 Finished products of meat, fish or shellfish, clams and other sea invertebrate animals 
 
1801 00 000 0  Cacao-beans, whole or granul ated, unroasted or roasted  
1802 00 000 0  Husks, peel and other waste products of cacao  
20 (except 
2001 10 000 0, 2009 50, 2009 71, 2009 79)
 Processed products of vegetables, fru it, nuts or other parts of plants  
2103 Products for sauce making and ready sauc es; flavoring agents and mixed spices; 
ground mustard and ready mustard  
2104 Soups and ready-to-use stocks, homoge nized ingredients of food products  
2401 Tobacco plants; tobacco wastes  
25 (except 2501 00 91, 
2529 21 000 0, 2529 22 000 0)
 Salt; sulphur; soils and stones; plastering materials, lime and cement  
26 Ores, slag and cinders  
3003 Pharmaceutical products (except for goods of position 3002, 3005 or 3006), 
consisting of mixtures of two or more components, for therapeutic and preventive 
purposes, but not packaged in dosage  forms or packaged for retail sale  
32 Tannic and dye extracts; tannins and their derivatives; coloring  substances; paints 
and lacquers; filling paints and ot her kinds of mastic; printing ink  
3301, 3302  Volatile oils; resinoids; mixtures of aromatic substances  
3402 Surface-active organic substances (except soap); Surface-active substances, 
detergents (including secondary detergents ) and cleaners, that contain or do not 
contain soap (except goods of position 3401)  
35 Protein substances; modified starch; glue; ferments  
3923 Products for transportation or packaging of goods, made of plasti c; corks, caps and 
other closure items  
4001 Natural rubber, balata, gutta-percha, guayule,  chicle and the like natural resins in 
original form or in the fo rm of plates or strips  
4403 41 000 0, 4403 49  Rough timber of exotics  
4407 21 – 4407 29  Ripped timber of exotics  
4420 Mosaic and enchased wood work; wooden caskets and boxes for jewelry or cutlery 
or the like tools; wooden statuettes and other decorations; w ooden furniture, not 
indicated in group 94  
4421 Other wooden work  
45 Cork and items made of cork  
46 Items made of straw and other materials for platting; wickerwork  
50 Silk 
5101 Wool, not carded or combed  
5201 00  Cotton fiber, not carded or combed  
53 Other plant textile fibers; span cotton and span cotton tissues  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 364 - 
 
  HS Code  Name of goods *  
56 Cotton, felt and unwoven textile; special ya rn; twines, cords, ropes, tows and items 
made of them  
5701 Knotted carpets and other textile floor  carpets, finished or unfinished  
5702 10 000 0  "Kilim", "Sumakh", "Kermani" carpets and the like hand-made carpets  
5705 00 800 0  Carpets and other textile floor carpets, finish ed or unfinished, made of wool or thin 
animal hair**, ***  
5808 Nubbly braid; nubbly trimmings without embroidery, except hand-knitted and 
machine-knitted; tassels, pompons and the like items  
6702 90 000 0  Artificial flowers, leaves an d fruits and their pa rts; products of artificial flowers, 
leaves or fruits, made of other materials  
68 Products made of stone, plaster, ceme nt, asbestos, mica or the like materials  
6913 Statuettes and other ceramic decorations  
6914 Other ceramic products  
7018 10  Glass beads, pearl-like products, precious or semi-precious stones and the like 
products of glass  
7117 Imitation jewellery  
9401 51 000 0, 9401 59 000 0
 Seat furniture made of reed, willow, bamboo or the like materials  
9403 81 000 0, 9403 89 000 0
 Furniture made of other materials, including reed, willow, bamboo or the like materials 
 
9403 90 900 0  Parts of furniture made of other materials  
9601 Finished and good for carving of ivory, bo ne, tortoise shell, an tler, staghorn, coral 
and other materials of animal origin and products made of these materials 
(including molded products)  
9602 00 000 0  Finished materials of vegetable or minera l origin, good for carving, and products 
made of these materials; molded or carved  wax, stearine, natura l resins or natural 
rubber products and other molded or carved  products, not indicated or included in 
other positions; processed uncured gelatin (except gelatin of position 3503) and products of uncured gelatin 
 
9603 Brooms, brushes (including brushes that  are parts of mechanisms, devices or 
vehicles), mechanical hand brush for fl oor cleaning, mops and feather dusters; 
bundles for making brooms or brushes; pa ds and rollers for paint; rubber mops 
(except rubber rollers for moisture removal)  
9604 00 000 0  Cribbles and hand sieves  
9606 Buttons, snaps, button mould and other parts of these items  
9609 Pencils (except indicated in position 9608), color pencils, pencil lead, crayons, 
charcoal pencils, chalk for writing or drawing and tailors chalk  
9614 00  Smoking pipes (including cu p-shaped parts), cigar-holders and cigarette-holders 
and their parts  
9615 11 000 0  Ebonite or plastic combs and the like items  
9617 00 000 0  Thermos and other vacuum vessels assembled; their parts, except glass bulbs  
97 Artwork, collection items and antiques  
* Goods in this list are defined only by HS codes;  names of goods are given for convenience.      
** Tariff preferences are granted only for hand-made carpets. *** It is necessary to follow both the cust oms commodity code, and name of the goods.  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 365 - ANNEX 11 
List of Goods and Rates which Are Subject to  Application of Import Customs Duty Rates 
Different from the CET by One of the member  States during the Transitional Period 
HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
3001 
 Glands and other organs for organo-therapeutic uses, dried, whethe r or not powdered; extracts of glands or other organs or of t heir secretions for organo-therapeutic 
uses; heparin and its salts; other human or animal substances prepared for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, not elsewhere spec ified or included: 
3001 20 - extracts of glands or othe r organs or of their secretions: 
3001 20 100 0 - - of human origin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3001 20 900 0 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3001 90 - other: 
3001 90 200 0 - - of human origin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - other: 
3001 90 980 0 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 
 Human blood; animal blood prepared for therapeutic, prophylactic or diagnostic uses; antisera and other blood fractions and mod ified immunological products, whether 
or not obtained by means of biotechnological processes; vaccines , toxins, cultures of microorganisms (excluding yeasts) and sim ilar products: 
3002 10 - antisera and other blood fractions and modified immunolo gical products, whether or not obtained by means of biotechno logical processes: 
3002 10 100 - - antisera: 
3002 10 100 1 - - - antisera against serpent's 
poison 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 10 100 9 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - other: 
3002 10 910 0 - - - haemoglobin, blood globulins 
and serum globulins 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - - other: 
3002 10 950 - - - - of human origin: 
3002 10 950 1 - - - - - factors of coagulation of 
human blood 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 10 950 9 - - - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 10 990 0 - - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 20 000 - vaccines for human medicine: 
3002 20 000 1 - - - vaccines against German 
measles 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 20 000 2 - - - vaccines against Hepatitus of 
form B 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 20 000 9 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 30 000 0 - vaccines for veterinary medicine 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 - other: 
3002 90 100 0 - - human blood 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 300 0 - - animal blood prepared for 
therapeutic, prophylactic or diagnostic uses 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 500 0 - cultures of microorganisms 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 900 0 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 Medicaments (excluding goods of Heading 3002, 3005 or 3006) consisting of mixed or unmixed products for therapeutic or pro phylactic uses, put up in measured doses 
(including those in the form of transdermal administrati on systems) or in forms or packings for retail sale: 
3004 10 000 - containing penicillins or derivatives thereof, with  a penicillanic acid structure, or streptomicins or their deri vatives:  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 366 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
3004 10 000 1 - - containing as active substances, 
only ampicillinetryhydratem or ampicilline-sodium salt or salts of benzylpenicillin and compounds or karbenicillin or oxacillin or phenoxymethylpenicillin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - put up in measured doses or in forms but not in packings for retail sale: 
3004 10 000 2 - - - containing as active 
substances, only streptomicin sulphate  0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 10 000 3 - - - - other 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3004 10  000 9 - - other:  0 0 5 CET duty rate 
3004 20 000 - containing other antibiotics: 
3004 20 000 1 - - - containing as active 
substances, only amickacin or gentamicin or grizeofulvin or doxycyklin or doksorubycin or kanamycin or fusidin acid and its sodium salt or laevomycetin (chloramphenicol) and its salts or lincomycin or methacyclin or nistatin or rifampicin or cephazolin or cep 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 20 000 2 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - other: 
3004 20 000 3 - - - containing as active 
substances only erytromicin or kanamicin sulphate 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 20 000 9 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 -Containing hormones or other 
compounds under tariff line 2937 but not containing antibiotics     
3004 32 000 - - containing adrenal cortical hormones, derivatives thereof: 
3004 32 000 1 - - - put up in forms or in packings 
of a kind sold by retail: 0 0 5 CET duty rate 
3004 32 000 9 - - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 39 000 0 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 40 000 - containing alkaloids or derivatives thereof but no t containing hormones, other products of heading 2937 or antibi otics: 
3004 40 000 1 - - put up in forms or in packings 
of a kind sold by retail:- - - koffein- benzoat of sodium or nikotinat of csantinol or papaverin or pilokarpin or teobromin or teophillamin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 40 000 9 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 50 000 - other medicaments containing vitamins or other products of Heading 2936:  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 367 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
3004 50 000 1 - - put up in forms or in packings 
of a kind sold by retail: - - - other medicaments containing ascorbini acid (vitamin C) or nicotin acid or cokarboxilase or nikotinamid or piridoxin or tiamin and its salts (vitamin B1) or cianokobalamin (vitamin B12) 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 50 000 9 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 90 000 0 other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 Pharmaceutical goods specified in Note 4 to this Chapter: 
3006 10 - sterile surgical catgut, similar sterile suture materials (including sterile absorbable surgical or dental yarns) and  sterile tissue adhesives for surgical wound closure; 
sterile laminaria and sterile laminaria tents; sterile absorbable surgical or dental haemostatics; sterile surgical or dental a dhesion barriers, whether or not absorbable: 
3006 10 100 0 - - sterile surgical catgut 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3006 10 300 0 - - sterile surgical or  dental  
adhesion barriers, whether or not absorbable 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 10 900 0 - - other 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3006 20 000 0 - blood- grouping reagents 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 30 000 0 - opacifying preparations for X-ray 
examinations; diagnostic reagents designed to be administered to the 
patient 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 40 000 0 - dental cements and other dental 
fillings; bone reconstruction cements 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 50 000 0 - first-aid boxes and kits 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 60 - chemical contraceptive preparations based on hormones, other compounds of heading 2937 or spermicides:  
3006 60 100 0 - - based on hormones or other 
compounds of heading 2937 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 60 900 0 - - based on spermicides 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 70 000 0 - gel preparations designed to be 
used in human or veterinary medicine as a lubricant for parts of 
the body for surgical operations or 
physical examinations or as a coupling agent between the body and medical instruments 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
 - other: 
3006 92 000 0 - - waste pharmaceuticals 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3901 Polymers of ethylene, in primary forms: 
3901 20 - polyethylene having a specific gravity of 0.94 or more: 
3901 20 900 0 - - other 0 0 CET duty rate  
7607 Aluminium foil (whether or not printed or backed with pape r, paperboard, plastics or similar backing materials), of a thic kness (excluding any backing) not exceeding 
0.2 mm: 
  - not backed: 
7607 20 - backed: 
7607 20 100 0 - - of a thickness (excluding any 
backing) of less than 0.021 mm 5 CET duty rate 
 - - of a thickness (excluding any backing) of not less than 0.021 mm but not more than 0.2 mm  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 368 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
8603 Self- propelled railway or tramway coaches, vans  and trucks, other than those of Heading 8604: 
8603 10 000 - powered from an external source of electricity: 
8603 10 000 8 - - other 0 CET duty rate  
8603 90 000 0  - other 0 CET duty rate  
8604 00 000 0 Railway or tramway maintenance 
or service vehicles, whether or not self- propelled (for example, workshops, cranes, ballast tampers, trackliners, testing coaches and track inspection vehicles) 5 CET duty rate  
8605 00 000  Railway or tramway passenger coaches, not self- prop elled; luggage vans, post office coaches and other special pur pose railway or tramway coaches, not self- propelled 
(excluding those of heading 8604) 
- other 
8605 00 000 8 - other 5 CET duty rate  
8606 Railway or tramway goods vans and wagons, not self- propelled: 
8606 10 000 0 - tank wagons and the like 5 CET duty rate  
8606 30 000 0 - self- discharging vans and 
wagons, other than those of subheading Nos. 8606 10 or 8606 20 5 CET duty rate  
 - other: 
8606 91 - - covered and closed: 
8606 91 100 0 - - - specially designed for the 
transport of highly radioactive materials 5 CET duty rate  
8606 91 800 0 - - - other 5 CET duty rate  
8606 92 000 0 - - open, with non- removable 
sides of a height exceeding 60 cm 5 CET duty rate  
8606 99 000 0 - - other 5 CET duty rate  
9018 Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental  or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, ot her electro-medical apparatus and sight-testing 
instruments: 
  - electro-diagnostic apparatus (including apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking physiological para meters): 
9018 11 000 0 - - electro-cardiographs 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 19 - - other: 
9018 19 100 0 - - - monitoring apparatus for 
simultaneous monitoring of 2 or more parametres 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 - - syringes, with or without needles: 
9018 31 100 - - - of plastics: 
9018 31 100 1 - - - - for insulin of volume not 
exceeding 2 ml 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 100 9 - - - other 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 900 - - - other: 
9018 31 900 1 - - - - for insulin of volume not 
exceeding 2 ml 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 900 9 - - - - other 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 32 - - tubular metal needles and needles for sutures: 
9018 32 100 0 - - - tubular metal needles 0 0 CET duty rate   
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 369 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
9018 32 900 0 - - - needles for sutures 0 0 CET duty rate  
 - dental devices and appliances, 
other:    
9018 49 - - other: 
9018 49 100 0 - - - chisel, disks, drills, brushes 
used in dental drill engines 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 90 - other instruments and appliances: 
9018 90 200 0 - - endoscopes 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 90 500 - - transfusion apparatus: 
9018 90 500 1 - - - apparatus for taking and 
transfusion of blood, blood substitute and infusion solutions 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 90 840 --other    
9018 90 840 1 - - - ultrasonic lithotripters 0 0 CET duty rate  
9022 Apparatus based on the use of X- rays or of alpha, beta or  gamma radiations, whether or not for medical, surgical, dental or veterinary uses, including radiography or 
radiotherapy apparatus, X- ray tubes and other X- ray generators , high-tension generators, control panels and desks, screens, e xamination or treatment tables, chairs 
and the like:  
 - apparatus based on the use of X- rays, whether or not for medical, surgical, dental or veterinary uses, including radiograph y or radiotherapy apparatus: 
9022 14 000 0 - - for medical, surgical, dental or 
veterinary uses 0 0 CET duty rate  
9406 00 Prefabricated buildings: 
 --from ferrous metals     
9406 00 310 0 - - - greenhouse 0 CET duty rate 
9406 00 800  - - from other materials     
9406 00 800 9 - - - other 0 CET duty rate 
 
 
 
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 370 - 
 
  ANNEX 12 
Formulae for Allocation of TRQ Volumes between Suppliers* 
1. Formulae for allocation of 25% of the established TRQ volumes among suppliers:  
 a)   
 
 
where q 9 is the TRQ volume of the supplier determined at the first stage;  
Q is the TRQ volume; 
 b)   
 
 
where S 9  is the supplier's share (in percentage terms); 
VI is the supplier's volume for the fi rst year of the previous period; 
VII-9 is the supplier's volume for nine months of the year prior to the year of TRQ establishment; 
V'I is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of Kazakhstan for the first year of the previous 
period; 
V'II-9 is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of Kazakhstan for nine months of the year prior 
to the year of TRQ establishment. 
2. Formulae for allocation of 100% of the established TRQ volumes among suppliers (after 
deduction of volumes calculated in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Annex): 
 a)          
 
 where q
12 is the TRQ volume established for the supplier determined at the second stage ;  
Q is the volume of the established TRQ; 
 b) 
 
 
where S 12 is the share of the supplier (in percentage terms); 
VI is the supplier's volume for the fi rst year of the previous period;  
VII is the supplier's volume for the second year of the previous period; 
V'I is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of Kazakhstan for the first year of the previous 
period;   
V'II is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of Kazakhstan for the second year of the previous 
period. 
*Source: Resolution of the Governme nt of Kazakhstan No.269 "On Certain Is sues of Allocation of Tariff Rate 
Quotas Volumes for Importation of Cert ain Kinds of Meat" of 24 March 2011. q9= 0,25Q × S 9 
100% 
S9= VI + V II-9 
× 100 
V'I + V' II-9 
q12= Q × S 12 
–  q 9,  
100% 
S12= VI + V II 
× 100, 
V'I + V' II  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 371 - ANNEX 13 
Methodology of Calculation of Fee Rates for Customs Escort 
 
No. Number of 
kilometres  Number of 
days spent 
in customs 
escort 
(with 
average 
travelling 
of 300 
km). Quantity of fuel 
used (in litres), 
calculated 
pursuant to 
Rules on 
Standards for 
Use of Fuel 
(Order of 
Ministry of 
Transports of 
20 July 2001)  Cost of fuel, in 
KZT (the average 
cost of 1 litre of 
fuel is taken as 
KZT 88 as of 
3 November 2010)  Cost for customs 
escort including 
travel allowances 
(per diem  and 
accommodation) and depreciation
 Costs of the 
second officer 
conducting 
customs escort 
(per annum 
and 
accommodation 
allowances)  Costs for return 
travel 
(fuel + 
depreciation) 
KZT The exchange 
rate – KZT per € 
as of 
3 November 2010  Total Costs 
(in €) 
1. 0-50 - 6 511  1,103  - 1,103  205.96  11  
2. 50-100  - 12 1,022  1,614  - 1,614  205.96  16  
3. 100-200  - 23 2,044  2,636  - 2,636  205.96  26  
4. 200-400  1.5 46 4,088  13,158  8,478  4,680  205.96  128  
5. 400-600  2.0 70 6,133  18,620  11,304  6,725  205.96  178  
6. 600-800  3.0 93 8,177  29,734  19,782  8,769  205.96  283  
7. 800-1,000  3.5 116 10,221  40,257  28,260  10,813  205.96  385  
8. 1000-1,500  5.0 174 15,332  55,029  36,738  15,924  205.96  523  
9. 1,500-2,000  7.0 232 20,442  78,279  53,694  21,034  205.96  743  
10. 2,000-2,500  8.5 290 25,553  92,459  62,172  26,145  205.96  878  
 Calculation of depreciation  was based on the widely used "Niva" automobile: 
- Average price of the car – KZT 1,440,000; - Per annum  depreciation rate – 15%; 
- 1,440,000*15/100 = 216,000; and - 216,000/365days = KZT 592 per day.  
Pursuant to limits established in the 2006 Republican budget: 
- Per diem  = KZT 2,826; and 
- Accommodation = KZT 5,652.  Source:  Government Resolution No. 24 "On Adoption of Rates of  Customs Fees Levied by Customs Bodies" of 21 January 2011. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 372 - 
 
  ANNEX 14(A) 
Goods / Works / Services with Sales Turn over Exempt from the Payment of VAT 
Sales turnover of the following goods, works and se rvices shall be exempt from value-added tax:   
1. State marks of postal payment; 
2. Excise strip stamps (accounting and control stamps intended for marking excisable goods 
in accordance with Article 653 of the Tax Code); 
3. Services rendered by authorized State bodi es  on which the State duty is collected; 
4. Property purchased for public use in accord ance with the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan; 
5. Fixed assets, investments in real estate, intangible and biological assets granted to a 
State-owned institution or State-owned enterprise in accordance with the legislation of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan; 
6. Ritual services of funeral bureaus, services of cemeteries and crematoria; 
7. Lottery tickets, except for services of  distribution thereof; 8. Services for providing information and technological communication between participants 
of settlements, including services of collecting, processing and information dissemination 
to participants of settlements related to transactions with payment cards; 
9. Services related to processing and/or repair  of goods imported to the customs territory of 
the EAEU in accordance with the customs procedure for processing on the customs 
territory;  
10. Works and services related to international tr ansportation in accordance with Article 244 of 
the Tax Code, namely:  works and services of loading, unloading, re-loading (discharge-
loading), forwarding of goods, including mails, exported from the territory of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan, imported into the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as 
freights  in transit; technical and air navigation services, airport activity; and services of sea ports related to servicing international lines; 
11. Services related to management, maintenance and operation of residential property; 
12. Banknotes and coins of the national currency; 
13. Goods, works and services, except for sale s turnover of goods, works and services of 
commercial and intermediary activities and production turnover from manufacture and 
sales of excisable goods, of public associ ations of disabled persons, as well as 
manufacturing organizations if such associations and organizations meet the following 
conditions: 
 Disabled persons represent not less than 51% of the total number of employees of such 
manufacturing organizations; WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 373 - 
 
   Employment costs of disabled persons are not less than 51% of total labour costs at 
specialised organizations at which disabled persons with hearing, speech or sight loss constitutes - not less than 35%; 
14. Works, services related to free repair and/or technical maintenance of goods during the 
warranty period specified in the transaction, including costs of spare parts and their 
components, where terms of transaction provid e for the quality assurance of goods, works 
and services sold by the taxpayer; 
15. Refined precious metals - gold, platinum manufactured of raw materials of its own 
production; 
16. Investment gold, provided the number of conditions specified in the Article are met; 
17. Services specified in Articles 411 and 420 of the Tax Code; 18. As specified in Articles 249-254 of the Tax Code; 
19. Services rendered when performing  notarial acts, advocate activity; 
20. Borrowing transactions in a monetary form on terms of chargeability, timeliness and 
repayment which are carried out as follows: 
 - by a national managing holding company; 
- by juridical persons in which 100% of voting shares are held by a national 
managing holding company.  The list of such juridical l persons shall be approved by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
21. Goods placed under the duty free customs procedure; and 
22. Services of a non-resident financed from the grant within the framework of 
inter-governmental agreement to which the Republic of Kazakhstan is a party, aimed at 
supporting (rendering the assistance to) low-income citizens in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  
Source:  Article 248 of the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV of 10 December 2008. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 374 - 
 
  ANNEX 14(B) 
Applied Unified Excise Tax Ra tes, as of 1 January 2014 
No. HS Code 
(EAEU)  Types of excisable goods  Rates of excise duties 
(in tenge per unit of measurement)  
1. ex. 2402  Cigarettes with a filter  3,000 tenge/1,000 pieces  
2. ex. 2402  Cigarettes without a filt er, cigarettes with a 
cardboard holder  3,000 tenge/1,000 pieces  
3. ex. 2402  Cigarillos  3,700 tenge/1,000 pieces  
4. ex. 2402  Cigars 475 tenge/piece  
5. ex. 2403  Tobacco for pipes, smoking, chewing, sucking, snuffing, for hookah and other, packed in a consumer pack and designated for final consumption, except for pharmaceutical products, which contain nicotine
 3,800 tenge/kilogram  
Note:  According to the Tax Code excise rates for tobacco were to be increased annually up to 2016. 
No. HS Code 
(EAEU)  Categories of excisable goods  Excise duty rates 
(tenge for each unit)  
1. ex. 2709 00  Crude oil, gas condensate  0 tenge/tonne  
2. ex. 8702 Motor vehicles carrying 10 or more passengers 
with engine capacity of more than 3000 cu cm, excluding minibuses, buses and trolley buses 
  
100 tenge/cm3 
 
ex. 8703 Auto or other motor vehicles for carrying 
passengers with the engine capacity of more than 3000 cu cm (except for manually-operated automobiles or automobiles with manually-operated adapter designed for disabled people) 
 
ex. 8704 Motor vehicles on auto chassis with a platform for 
cargo and driver's cab separated from cargo module by a fixed partition,  with engine capacity of 
more than 3000 cu cm 
 
 
 
No. HS Code 
(EAEU)  Types of excisable goods  Rates of excise duties 
(in the tenge per unit of measurement)  
1 2 3 4 
1. ex. 2207  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated with the alcohol concentration of 80 volume % or more (except for ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, which is sold to manufacture alcohol products, medical and pharmaceutical prep arations, and also 
which is supplied to State medical institutions within the limits of established quotas), ethyl alcoho l and other types of 
alcohol, denaturated, of any concentration (except for ethyl alcohol (ethanol) 
denaturated  fuel (not colourless, coloured) 
to be consumed in the domestic market)
 600 tenge/litre  
2. ex. 2207  Ethyl alcohol (ethanol) denaturated fuel 
(not colourless, colour ed) to be consumed 
in the domestic market  1 tenge/litre  
3. ex. 2208  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, alcohol tinctures and other alcohol drinks with the 
alcohol concentration less than 80 volume 
% (except for ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, which is sold to manufacture alcohol products, medical and pharmaceutical prep arations, and also 
which is supplied to State medical institutions within the limits of established quotas)
 750 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 375 - 
 
  4. ex. 2207  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated with the 
alcohol concentration of 80 volume % or more which is sold to manufacture alcohol products
 60 tenge/litre  
5. ex. 2208  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, alcohol tinctures and other alcohol drinks with the alcohol concentration less than 80 volume %, which are sold to manufacture alcohol 
products
 75 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol  
6. ex. 3003, 
3004 Alcohol-bearing products of medical designation registered in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan as medical preparations
 500 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol  
7. 2208 Alcohol products (except for cognac, brandy, wines, wine material and beer)
 1000 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol  
8. 2208 Cognac, brandy  250 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol  
9. 2204, 2205, 
2206 00  Wines 35 tenge/litre  
10. from 2204, 2205, 2206 00
 Wine material (except for one which is sold to manufacture ethyl alcohol and alcohol 
products)
 170 tenge/litre  
11. ex. 2204, 2205, 2206 00
 Wine material, which is sold to manufacture ethyl alcohol and alcohol products
 20 tenge/litre  
12. 2203 00  Beer 26 tenge/litre  
13. 2202 90 100 1  Beer with the volume content of ethyl alcohol less than 0.5%
 0 tenge/litre 
 
No.  
 Excise duty rates for each tonne (tenge) 
Petroleum (except 
aircraft motor gasoline)  
(HS Code EurAsEC 
2710 11 410 0-  2710 11 590 0) Motor fuel(HS 
Code EurAsEC 
2710 19  
3100-2710  
19 490 0) 
1 2 3 4 
1.  Wholesale trade by petroleum producers (except aircraft 
motor gasoline) and motor fuel  of domestic manufacture  4,500  540  
2.  Wholesale trade of petroleum and motor fuel (except 
aircraft motor gasoline) by in dividuals and le gal entities  0  0  
3.  Retail sale by petroleum producers (except aircraft 
motor gasoline) and motor fuel for own production needs  5,000  600 
 
4.  Retail sale of petrol and motor fuel (except aircraft 
motor gasoline) by individual s and legal entities for own 
production needs 500  60  
5.  Import  4,500  540  
 
Note: The nomenclature of goods shall be determined with the code of the CN FEA EurAsEC and (or) name 
of goods. 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 376 - 
 
  ANNEX 15(A) 
Cryptographic Devices Subject to Export and Import Control* 
Description CET codes (HS 2012) 
1. Printers, copying machines, fax machines and 
their electronic modules that have encryption (cryptographic)  functions  Ex. 8443 31;  
Ex. 8443 32 100 9;  Ex. 8443 32 300 0; Ex. 8443 99 100 9.  
2. Handheld  machines for recording, playback and 
visual presentation of data with calculating 
functions that have encr yption (cryptographic) 
functions  Ex. 8470 10 000 9  
3. Cash registers with encryption (cryptographic) 
functions  Ex. 8470 50 000  
4. Handheld computers with encryption 
(cryptographic) functions  Ex. 8471 30 000 0;  
5. Computers and their parts with encryption 
(cryptographic) functions Ex. 8471 30 000 0;  
Ex. 8471 41 000 0;  Ex. 8471 49 000 0;  Ex. 8471 50 000 0;  Ex. 8471 90 000 0;  Ex. 8473 30 200 9.  
6. Computer devices with encryption 
(cryptographic) functions Ex. 8471 70 500 0;  
Ex. 8471 70 980 0;  
Ex. 8471 80 000 0.  
7. Electronic modules and parts of handheld 
devices with encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8473 21 100 0;  
Ex. 8473 21 900 0;  Ex. 8473 30 200 9;  Ex. 8473 30 800 9.  
8. Subscriber communication equipment with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 11 000 0;  
Ex. 8517 12 000 0;  
Ex. 8517 18 000 0.  
9. Base stations with encryption (cryptographic) 
functions Ex. 8517 61 000 1;  
Ex. 8517 61 000 2; Ex. 8517 61 000 8. 
10. Telecommunications equipment and its parts 
with encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 62 000;  
Ex. 8517 69 390 0;  Ex. 8517 69 900 0;  Ex. 8517 70 900. 
11. Programme encryption (cryptographic) devices 
regardless of information carrier Ex. 8523 29 310 1;  
Ex. 8523 29 310 2;  Ex. 8523 29 330;  Ex. 8523 49 250 0;  Ex. 8523 49 450 0;  Ex. 8523 49 910 1;  Ex. 8523 49 930 0;  Ex. 8523 51 910 1;  Ex. 8523 51 930 0;  Ex. 8523 52;  Ex. 8523 59 910 1;  Ex. 8523 59 930 0;  Ex. 8523 80 910 1;  Ex. 8523 80 930 0. 
12. Broadcasting or television equipment and its 
parts with encryption (c ryptographic) functions Ex. 8525 50 000 0  
Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8529 90 200 1  Ex. 8529 90 650 0  Ex. 8529 90 970 0  
13. Radio navigational receivers, remote control 
equipment and their parts with encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8526 91 200 0  
Ex. 8526 91 800 0  Ex. 8526 92 000  
Ex. 8529 90 650 0  
Ex. 8529 90 970 0  
14. Internet access equipment and television 
receivers/sets with communication function, their parts with encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8528 71 130 0  Ex. 8529 90 650 0  Ex. 8529 90 970 0  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 377 - 
 
  Description CET codes (HS 2012) 
15. Electronic integral schemes, storing devices with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions f or having encryption (cryptog raphic) devices  Ex. 8542 31 901 1  
Ex. 8542 31 909 9  Ex. 8542 32 900 9  
16. Other electric devices and equipment with 
individual functions that have encryption (cryptographic) devices Ex. 8543 70 900 0  
Ex. 8543 90 000 9 
* In order to use this list, it is necessary to follow both the customs commodity code, and description of the 
goods. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 378 - 
 
  ANNEX 15(B) 
Special Technical Devices Subject to  Export and Import Licensing* 
Description CET codes (HS 2012) 
1. Special technical devices for disguised obtaining and registration of acoustic information:    
(а) wired connection systems intended for disguised 
obtaining and/or registration of acoustic information; Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  Ex. 8517 69 390 0  Ex. 8517 69 900 0  
(b) radio-electronic devices intended for disguised obtaining 
and/or registration of acoustic information;  
 Ex. 8517 70 900 1  
Ex. 8518 30 950 0  Ex. 8518 40  Ex. 8523 49 450 0  Ex. 8525 50 000 0  Ex. 8525 60 000 0  
Ex. 8527  
Ex. 8529 10 390 0  
(c) electronic devices intended for disguised registration of 
acoustic information. 
 Ex. 8519 81 510 0  
Ex. 8519 81 550  
Ex. 8519 81 610  
Ex. 8519 81 650  Ex. 8519 81 750  Ex. 8519 81 850  Ex. 8519 89 900 0  Ex. 8523 51 
2. Special technical devices intended for disguised visual observation and recording:  
(а) pin-holelens Ex. 9002  
(b) photo cameras having at least one of the following 
features: camouflaged under another items; having pin-hole lens  Ex. 9006 51 000 0  
Ex. 9006 52 000 9  Ex. 9006 53 100 0 
(c) television and videocameras having at least one of the 
following features:  camouflaged under another items; having pin-hole lens Ex. 8525 80  
 
(d) wired connection systems intended for disguised 
obtaining and/or registration of video information; Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  
(e) radio-electronic devices intended for disguised obtaining 
and/or registration of video information; 
 Ex. 8517 69 390 0  
Ex. 8517 69 900 0  
Ex. 8523 49 450 0  Ex. 8525 50 000 0  Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8527  Ex. 8529 10 390 0  
(f) electronic devices intended for disguised registration of 
acoustic information. Ex. 8521  
Ex. 8523 51 
3. Special technical devices for disguised interception of telephone conversations: 
(a) wired connection systems intended for disguised 
interception of telephone conversations; Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000   
(b) radio-electronic devices intended for disguised;  Ex. 8517 69 390 0  
Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8525 50 000 0  Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8527  Ex. 8529 10 390 0  
(c) electronic devices intended for disguised registration of 
information on telephone conversations. Ex. 8519 81 510 0  
Ex. 8519 81 550  Ex. 8519 81 610  Ex. 8519 81 650  
Ex. 8519 81 750  
Ex. 8519 81 850  Ex. 8523 51 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 379 - 
 
  Description CET codes (HS 2012) 
4. Special technical devices for disguised eavesdropping 
and registration of information from technical channels 
of connection  
 Ex. 8471  
Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8517 69 390 0  Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8523 29 310 1  Ex. 8523 29 310 2 Ex. 8523 49 250 0  Ex. 8523 49 910 1  Ex. 8523 51 910 1  Ex. 8523 59 910 1  Ex. 8523 80 910 1  Ex. 8527  
5. Special technical devices for disguised control of 
messages received and sent by mail Ex. 9022 19 000 0  
 
6. Special technical devices for disguised research of 
objects and documents, including portable compact X-ray TV units, fluoroscopic and radiographic equipment.  Ex. 9022 19 000 0  
  
7. Special technical devices for disguised entry and inspection of premises, vehicles and other objects: 
(a) means for disguised opening of closure devices;  Ex. 8301 70 000 0  
 
(b) portable compact X-ray TV units, fluoroscopic and 
radiographic equipment. Ex. 9022 19 000 0 
8. Special technical devices for disguised control over 
movement of vehicles Ex. 8526 10 000 9  
Ex. 8526 91  
9. Special technical devices for disguised obtaining 
(modifying, deleting) of information from technical devices of information storage, processing and transmission Ex. 8471  
Ex. 8505 90 200 0  Ex. 8517 61 000  Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8517 69 390 0  
Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8523 29 310 1  Ex. 8523 29 310 2  Ex. 8523 49 250 0  Ex. 8523 49 910 1  Ex. 8523 51 910 1  Ex. 8523 59 910 1  Ex. 8523 80 910 1  Ex. 8527  
10. Special technical devices for disguised identification of 
persons.  Special technical devices for disguised registration of psychophysiological reactions of humans Ex. 9019 10 900 9 
  
* In order to use this list, it is necessary to follow both the customs commodity code, and description of the 
goods. 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 380 - 
 
  ANNEX 15(C) 
Categories of Goods which are Encryption (C ryptographic) Means or Containing thereof 
the Technical and Encryption Characteristics of which are Subject to Notification 
1. Goods containing encryption technology which consist of any of the following components: 
 (a) a symmetric cryptographic algorithm employing a key length not exceeding 56 bits 
  l o n g ;  o r   (b) an asymmetric cryptographic algorith m based on one of the following methods: 
- factorization of integers not exceeding 512 bits; 
- computation of discrete logarithms in multiplicative group of a finite field of a size 
not exceeding 512 bits; or 
- the discrete logarithm in group other than in item B hereof not exceeding 112 bits.  
Remark: (1) Bites of parity are not included in the length of a key. 
(2) The term "cryptography" does not refer to fixed methods of compression or 
coding of data. 
2. Goods containing encryption with the following limited functions: 
 (a) authentication, including all the aspects of access control without encryption of 
files and texts, except encryption related to passwords and identification and other 
similar data protection from unauthorized access; and 
 (b) electronic digital signature. 
Remark: Functions of authentication and electronic digital signature include connected with 
them function of keys distribution. 
3. Encryption (cryptographic) means, which are the components of programme operations 
systems, cryptographic abilities of which canno t be altered by users, which are developed 
for installation by the user individually without further substantial support by the provider 
and technical documentations (the description of algorithms of cryptographic changes, 
protocols on interactions, description of interfaces, etc.) on which is available. 
4. Personal smart-cards: 
 (a) cryptographic abilities of which are limited by use in equipment and systems, 
referred to in paragraphs 5-8 of the present list; or 
 (b) for wide, publicly available use, cryptographic abilities of which are not available 
for use and which as a result of special development have limited abilities of 
protection of stored personal information on them. 
Remark: If a smart-card can perform few functions, then the control status of each of them 
is defined separately. 
5. Receiving equipment for radio-broadcasting and commercial TV broadcasting or analogue 
commercial equipment for broadcasting to limited audience without encryption of digital signal, except for the cases of use of encryption solely for management of video or 
audio-channels and sending of bills or return of information connected to the programme 
to the providers of broadcasting. 
6. Equipment encryption functionality of which are not available to the user, specially 
developed or limited to the use with any of the following:  
 ( а) software is protected from copy; 
 (b) access to any of the following: 
- data protected from copy stored on the medium available for read only; and WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 381 - 
 
  - information, stored in encrypted form on media, when these media are offered for 
sale to public in identical kits; 
 (c) control of coping of audio- and vide o-information protected by the copyrights.  
7. Encryption (cryptographic) equipment specia lly designed and limited for banking use and 
financial operations. 
Remark: Financial operations include duties and charges for transport services and 
crediting.  
8. Portable or mobile radio electronic devi ces for civil use (for example for use with 
commercial civil cellular radio communication systems) that are not capable of transmitting encrypted data directly to another radiotelephone or equipment.  
9. Wireless radio equipment encrypting information only in radio channel with the maximum 
effective range of unboosted cordless operation is less than 400 meters according to the 
manufacturer's specifications.  
10. Encryption (cryptography) means used for protection of technological channels of 
information-telecommunication systems and communication networks.  
11. Goods whose encryption function is blocked by the manufacture.  12. "Mass market goods" are goods that meet all of the following:   
 (a) Generally available to the public in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan  by 
being sold, without restriction, from stock at retail selling points by means of any of the following: 
  1. Over-the-counter transactions; 
  2. Mail order transactions; 
  3. Electronic transactions; or    4. Telephone call transactions. 
 (b) The cryptographic functionality cannot easily be changed by the user;  
 (c) Designed for installation by the user without further substantial support by the 
supplier; and 
 (d) When necessary, details of the items are accessible and will be provided, upon 
request, to the appropriate authority in the regulator's country in order to ascertain compliance with conditions described in paragraphs (a) to (c) above.  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 382 - 
 
  ANNEX 15(D) 
Format of Notification of Goods which contain Encryption Means 
Registered in the Register "___" ___________ 20__ .     N _____ 
 
Place for Seal      ___________________________________  
 ________________                        (signature of a person of authorized body)       (Name) 
 
NOTIFICATION 
 
on characteristics of goods (products), which contain encryption means 
 
1. Name of a good (product) _____________________________________________________ 
______________________________________________________________________________
___  
2. Use of a good (product) 
_______________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ 
 
3. Requisites of a producer of a good (product) _______________________________________ 
______________________________________________________________________________
____  
4. Used encryption algorithms:                            N of a good category 
                                                                    from Annex 1  а) _______________________________________________________________________ 
____________________________________________________________________________ 
b) _______________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 
c) ________________________________________________________________________ 
_____________________________________________________________________________  
5. Presence of functional ability in a good (product), which is not described in a provided 
exploitation documents to the user ______________________________  6. Period of validity of notification till "__" _____________ 20__. 
 
7. Requisites of the applicant _________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 
 
8. Requisite of the document of a producer, wh o provided to the authority's representative 
the rights for drafting of notification (if necessary)  
___________________________________________ 
_____________________________________________________________________________  9. The date of adaptation of notification "__" _______________ 20__ . 
 
 Place for Seal       ______________________________    __________________ 
                      (signa ture of applicant)           (Name) 
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 383 - 
 
  ANNEX 16 
Additional Information on Trade Remedy Measures Applied in Kazakhstan and the 
Eurasian Economic Union 
(i) Prior to the date of the entry into force of the Agreement on Application of Safeguard, 
Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures to Third Countries of 25 January 2008, there were no trade remedy measures in place in Kazakhstan.  
(ii) On the date of the entry into force of  the Agreement on Application of Safeguard, 
Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures to Third Countries of 25 January 2008, there was one safeguard investigation in relation to accumulators in Kazakhstan, which had been initiated on 
8 June 2010.  The investigation had been comp leted without introduction of the safeguard 
measure due to the fact that the complainant did not satisfy the criteria of the 25% of the total 
production of the Customs Union.  
(iii) Currently, Kazakhstan did not apply any safeguard measures at the national level. 
There were two safeguard and eight anti-dumping measures applied on the common 
customs territory of the EAEU.  
No. Product Type of measure Period of application 
1. Cold-worked seamless 
pipes and tubes of stainless steel Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of 
this product from China  
14 May 2018 
2. Enameled baths of cast 
iron Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of 
this product from China 25 January 2018 
3. Light commercial 
vehicles Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of 
this product from Germany, Italy and Turkey 14 June 2018 
4. Some types of steel 
pipes Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of 
this product from Ukraine 18 November 2015 
5. Rolling-contact 
bearings Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of 
this product from China 20 January 2018 
6. Steel forged rolls for 
rolling mills  Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of 
this product from Ukraine 27 February 2015 
7. Rolled metal with 
polymeric coating Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of 
this product from China 30 June 2017 
8. Graphite electrodes Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of 
this product from India 25 January 2018 
9. Tableware and 
kitchenware of porcelain Safeguard measure 28 September 2016 
10. Combine harvesters 
and modules thereof Safeguard measure 21 August 2016 
(iv) At the moment, five anti-dumping investigations were being conducted by the EEC.  
No. Product Type of investigation Date of initiation of 
investigation 
1. Seamless steel tubes used 
for the drilling and operation of oil and gas wells Anti-dumping investigation with regard to 
imports of this product from China 31 March 2014 
2. Rolling-contact bearings Sunset  review of anti-dumping measure 
with regard to imports of this product from Ukraine 28 February 2014 
3. Lemon acid Antidumping investigation with regard to 
imports of this product from China 21 February 2014 
4. Kitchenware and tableware 
made of stainless steel Antidumping investigation with regard to 
imports of this product from China 31 January 2014 
5. Steel rods Antidumping in vestigation with regard to 
imports of this product from Ukraine 20 November 2013 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 384 - 
 
  ANNEX 17(A) 
Rates of Export Duties Currently Applied by Kazakhstan 
HS Number Description of Goods Duty Rate 
4101 Raw pelts of cattle (including buffalos) or animals of 
horse family (vapored or salted, dried, limed, pickled or conserved by other methods, but not tanned, not curried as parchment or without further processing), with hair or without hair, splitting or non-splitting.  20%, but not less than  
€200 per 1,000 kg 
4102  Raw pelts of sheep or lambs (vapored or salted, dried, 
limed, pickled or conserved by other methods, but not 
tanned, not curried as parchment or without further processing), woolly or non-woolly, splitting or 
non-splitting. 20%, but not less than  
€200 per 1,000 kg 
4103 Other raw skins (vapored or salted, dried, limed, pickled 
or conserved by other meth ods, but not tanned, not 
curried as parchment or without further processing), with 
hair or without hair, splitting or non-splitting. 20%, but not less than  
€200 per 1,000 kg 
5101 -  5104 00 000 0 Un-carded and uncombed wool. 10%, but not less than   
€50 per 1,000 kg 
7204* Iron-and-steel waste and scrap; ferrous metal ingots for 
re-melting (charging ingots). 15%, but not less than  
€20 per 1,000 kg 
7302 Ferrous metal products, used for railway lines and 
tram-lines:  rails, flange rail and rack rails, switch blades, point frogs, regulating rods and other cross connections, crossties, splice bars and base-plates, wedges, bedplates, hood joint bolts, bad plates and bracing wires, foundation 
slabs, cross bars and other details for connection and bonding of rails.  20%, but not less than  
€20 per 1,000 kg  
7404 00 Copper waste and scrap. 30%, but not less than  
€330 per 1,000 kg 
76   Aluminium and aluminium products 
Aluminium and beryllium ligature. 15%, but not less than  
€100 per 1,000 kg  
8607 Parts of locomotives and motor-wags of trams and 
rolling-stocks.  20%, but not less than  
€15 per 1,000 kg 
2709 00 900 9 Crude Oil Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 12 110 0 –  2710 12 900 9, 2710 20 900 0 Light distillates and products Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 110 0 –  
2710 19 290 0, 
2710 20 900 0 Middle distillates: for specific re-treatment processes; for 
chemical conversions during processes; except for 
indicated in sub-position 2710 19 110 0 for other aims Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 420 0 –  
2710 19 480 0, 
2710 20 110 0, 
2710 20 150 0, 2710 20 190 0 Hard distillates:  gas oils Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 510 1, 
2710 19 510 9 –  
2710 19 550 9 Hard distillates:  liquid fuels Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 620 1 - 
2710 19 680 9, 
2710 20 310 1, 
2710 20 310 9, 2710 20 350 1, 2710 20 350 9, 2710 20 370 1, 2710 20 370 9, 2710 20 390 1, 2710 20 390 9 Hard distillates:  liquid fuels Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2713 20 000 0 –  2713 90 900 0 Bitumen Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 310 0 –  2710 19 350 0 Hard distillates:  gas oils Calculated with a specific 
formula 
* Rates of export customs duties not applied with respect to goods exported to the customs territory of the 
European Union countries, which are the countries of destination in these cases.  This treatment will be eliminated upon Kazakhstan' s accession to the WTO. WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 385 - 
 
  ANNEX 17(B) 
Results of Negotiations on Export Duties Re ferred to in paragraph 534 of this Report 
 HS category From the date of 
Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO After one year 
starting  from 
Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO After two years 
starting from 
Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO After three years 
starting from Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO 
7204 Ferrous waste and scrap; remelting scrap ingots of iron or steel 15%, but not less 
than €15 per tonne 15%, but not less 
than €15 per tonne 10%, but not less 
than €10 per tonne 5%, but not less 
than €5 per tonne WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 386 - 
 
  ANNEX 18 
Unified List of Products for which Mand atory Requirements are Established in 
the Customs Union 
1. Machinery and equipment; 
2. Low-voltage equipment; 
3. High-voltage equipment; 4. Devices operating on gaseous fuels; 
5. Equipment operating under excess 
pressure; 
6. Vessels working under pressure; 7. Equipment for use in hazardous 
environments; 
8. Rides, equipment for children's 
playgrounds; 
9. Elevators; 
10. Wheeled vehicles. 11. Tractors. 
12. Agricultural machinery; 
13. Machinery for forestry; 14. Tires; 15. Rolling stock of railways, including 
high-speed; 
16. Metro Rolling Stock; 17. Light rail vehicles and trams; 
18. Objects of sea transport; 
19. Objects of inland waterway transport. 20. Boats; 
21. Buildings and facilities; 
22. Building materials and products. 23. Rail transport infrastructure, 
including high-speed; 
24. Underground railway (metro) 
infrastructure; 
25. Highways; 
26. Pyrotechnic compositions and goods 
containing them; 
27. Explosives for civilian use and 
products containing them; 
28. Production of light industry (ready-
made piece-goods, carpets, knitted goods, clothing and leather goods, 
shoes, furs and fur products) ; 
29. Toys; 30. Products for children and 
adolescents; 
31. Products for children care; 32. Cookware; 
33. Products for sanitary and hygienic 
purposes; 
34. Perfumes and cosmetics; 35. Oral hygiene products; 36. Packaging; 
37. Personal protective equipment. 
38. Means of fire safety. 39. Fire extinguishing means; 
40. Medical products; 
41. Sanitary products; 42. Furniture products; 43. Chemical products; 
44. Synthetic detergents; 
45. Household chemical goods; 46. Paints and solvents; 
47. Fertilizers; 
48. Plant protection products; 49. Petrol, diesel and marine fuel, jet fuel 
and heating oil; 
50. Lubricants, oils and special fluids;  51. Devices and systems of water, gas, 
heat, electricity; 
52. Devices and systems of oil and 
refined products; 
53. Food products; 
54. Alcoholic products; 
55. Feed and feed additives  56. Grain; 
57. Tobacco products. 
58. Hunting and sporting weapons, 
ammunition; 
59. Telecommunications facilities. 
60. Coal and its products; 
61. Liquefied petroleum gas used as fuel; 62.       Materials contacting human skin; 
63.       Products intended for civil defence 
and protection of natural and man-made disasters; 
64.       Oil, prepared for transportation and 
use; 
65.       Combustible natural gas, prepared 
for transportation and use;  
66.       Mainline pipelines for 
transportation of liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons. 
 
  
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 387 - 
 
  ANNEX 19 
List of Goods Imported by Establishments no t Subject to Inclusion in the Register of 
Establishments of Third Countries 
No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
1 from 0301 Live fish intended for breeding 
in decorative purposes, including aquarium fish, and not intended for human consumption veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
2 from 0401 Milk and cream, not 
concentrated nor containing added sugar or other sweetening matter (except raw milk and raw cream) veterinary 
certificate  yes The measure 
applies to goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the 
import permit 
and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
3 0402 Milk and cream, concentrated or 
containing added sugar or other sweetening matter
 1 veterinary 
certificate  yes The measure 
applies to goods imported from third countries into the territory 
of the Republic 
of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 388 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
4 0403 Buttermilk, curdled milk and 
cream, yogurt, kefir and other fermented or acidified milk and cream, whether or not concentrated or containing added sugar or other sweetening matter or flavored or containing added fruit, nuts or cocoa
1 veterinary 
certificate yes The measure 
applies to goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not 
required, but the 
import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
5 0404 Whey, whether or not 
concentrated or containing added sugar or other sweetening matter; products 
consisting of natural milk 
constituents, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter
1 veterinary 
certificate yes The measure 
applies to goods imported from third countries 
into the territory 
of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 389 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
6 0405 Butter and others fats and oils 
derived from milk1; dairy 
spreads1 veterinary 
certificate yes The measure 
applies to goods 
imported from 
third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the 
company that 
issued controlled goods into circulation 
7 from 0406 Cheese and curd1 other than 
processed cheese containing sausage, meat, meat offal, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, or the products of group 04 EAEU HS or any combination of these products
2 veterinary 
certificate yes The measure 
applies to goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory 
of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 390 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
8 from 0406 Processed cheese containing 
sausage, meat, meat offal, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, or the products of group 04 EAEU HS or any combination of these products
2 veterinary 
certificate – for goods, imported to the territory of the Republic of Belarus, for goods imported to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, – veterinary 
certificate 
(except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure 
applies to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus The measure 
applies to goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
and the Russian 
Federation, inclusion into the register is required, if company – manufacturer of sausage, meat, meat by-products, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, or products of group 04 of EAEU HS Code or any combination of these products is not included in the registry 
9 0407 Birds' eggs, in shell, fresh, 
preserved1 or cooked1 veterinary 
certificate yes The measure 
applies to goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, 
inclusion into 
the register is required only for processed egg products 
10 0504 00 
000 0 intestines, bladders and 
stomachs of animals (other than fish), whole and lumped, fresh, chilled, frozen, salted, in brine, dried or smoked veterinary 
certificate yes The measure 
applies to goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 391 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary 
certificate 
should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
11 from 0507 I v o r y ,  t o r t o i s e  s h e l l ,  b o n e  o f  a  
whale or other marine mammals, horns, antlers, hooves, nails, claws and beaks, unprocessed or exposed to primary processing (without shaping); powder and 
wastes thereof veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include 
number and (or) 
name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
12 0510 00 
000 0 Ambergris, castor, civet and 
musk; Spanish fly; bile, including dried; glands and other products of original origin used in the manufacture of pharmaceutical products, fresh, chilled, frozen or otherwise provisionally preserved for short-term storage veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the 
company that 
issued controlled goods into circulation 
13 0511 Products of animal origin, not 
included in other EAEU HS positions; dead animals of group 01 EAEU HS or 03 EAEU HS, unfit for human consumption veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled 
goods into 
circulation 
14 0511 99 
859 2 Horsehair and wastes thereof, 
including in the form of wadding with or without substrate  veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 392 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
15 from 0511, 
from 9601, from 9705 00 000 0 Hunter's trophies, stuffed 
animals, including exposed to taxidermy treatment or preserved veterinary 
certificate (only for untreated (canned) hunting trophies) No - for those 
past complete taxidermy treatment Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate (if necessary) should include the name of taxidermist workshop where primary processing of trophies was performed, or hunting entity 
16 from 1001 
19 000 0 Hard wheat (only forage grain) 3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
17 from 1001 
99 000 0 Soft wheat (only forage grain) 3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
18 from 1002 
90 000 0 Rye (only forage grain) 3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not 
required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 393 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
19 from 1003 
90 000 0 Barley (only forage grain) 3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
20 from 1004 
90 000 0 Oat (only forage grain) 3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
21 from 1005 
90 000 0 Corn (only forage grain) 3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
22 from 1201 
90 000 0 Soybeans (only forage grain) 3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
23 from 1208 flours, meals and pellets of oil 
seeds (except mustard seeds) intended for feeding animals
3  veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the 
veterinary 
certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 394 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
24 from 1211 Plants and parts thereof 
(including seeds and fruits), used in veterinary, fresh or dried, whole or milled, crushed
3 veterinary 
certificate – upon declaration the use of veterinary products, including animal feed yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
25 from  1212 
99 950 0 Bee bread, pollen veterinary 
certificate The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
26 1213 00 
000 0 Cereal straw and husks, 
unprepared, whether or not chopped, ground, pressed or in the form of pellets
3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
27 1214 Rutabagas, leaf beat (mangold), 
fodder roots, hay, alfalfa (lucerne), clover, sainfoin, forage kale, lu pines, vetches 
and similar forage products, whether or not in the form of pellets
3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
28 from 1301 
90 000 0 Propolis  veterinary 
certificate The measure 
is applied to goods 
imported into 
the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the 
veterinary 
certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 395 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
29 1501 Pig fat (including lard) and 
poultry fat, other than that of position 15 and 62  veterinary 
certificate – only for controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
30 1502 Fats of bovine animals, sheep or 
goats, other than those of position 62  veterinary 
certificate – only for controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
31 1503 00 Lard stearin, lard oil, 
oleostearin, oleo-oil and tallow oil, not emulsified or mixed or otherwise prepared veterinary 
certificate – only for controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
32 1504 Fats and oils and their fractions, 
of fish or marine mammals, whether or not refined, but not chemically modified veterinary 
certificate – only for controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
33 1505 00 Grease and fatty substances 
derived therefrom (including lanolin) veterinary 
certificate – only for controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 396 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
goods into circulation 
34 1506 
00 000 0 Other animal fats and oils and 
their fractions, whether or not refined, but not chemically modified veterinary 
certificate – only for controlled products of 
animal origin 
intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure 
is applied to goods imported into 
the territory of 
the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit 
and veterinary 
certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
35 1516 10 Animal fats and oils and their 
fractions, partly or wholly hydrogenated, inter-esterified, re-esterified or elaidinized, whether or not refined, but not exposed to further processing veterinary 
certificate – only for controlled products of animal origin intended for food 
and feed 
purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of 
Belarus Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate 
should include 
number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
36 1518 00 Animal or vegetable fats and oils 
and their fracti ons, boiled, 
oxidized, dehydrated, sulfurized, blown, polymerized by heat in vacuum or in inert gas or otherwise chemically modified, excluding those of heading 1516; inedible mixtures or 
preparations of animal or 
vegetable fats or oils or of fractions of different fats or oils  veterinary 
certificate (when declaring the use of products in veterinary, including in animal feed) – for goods 
imported into the 
territory of the Republic of Belarus, for goods imported to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, - veterinary certificate (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, as well as upon 
import to the 
territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of goods, specified in this position, except for the vegetable fats Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) 
name of the 
company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
37 1603 00 Extracts and juices of meat, fish 
or crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 397 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
38 from 1902 
20 Stuffed pasta, whether or not 
cooked or otherwise prepared, 
containing fish, crustaceans, 
mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, sausages, meat, meat offal, blood, or the products of heading 04, or any combination of these products
2 veterinary 
certificate  
(except for 
products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure 
is applied to 
goods 
imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) Inclusion in the 
registry is not 
required, but the 
veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
39 from 1904 
20 Cereals (except corn) in the 
form of grain or flakes or otherwise treated (except flour, fine and meal), 
pre-cooked or otherwise 
prepared, containing fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, sausages, meat, meat offal, blood, or the products of heading 04, or any combination of these produkts
2 veterinary 
certificate  (except for products 
containing less 
than 50% components of animal origin) The measure 
is applied to goods imported into 
the territory of 
the Republic of Belarus (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary 
certificate 
should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
40 from group 
20 Derivatives of vegetables, fruit, 
nuts or other parts of plants and mixtures thereof, containing sausage, meat, meat offal, blood, fish or crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic 
invertebrates, or products of 
heading 04, or any combination of these products
2 veterinary 
certificate  (except for products containing less than 50% 
components of 
animal origin) The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of 
Belarus 
(except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include 
number and (or) 
name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
41 from 2104 Soups and broths and 
preparations therefor; homogenized composite food preparations (except vegetable) homogenized composite food products containing sausage, meat, meat offal, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other 
aquatic invertebrates, or the 
products of heading 04 HS or any combination these produkts
2 veterinary 
certificate  (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus (except for 
products 
containing less than 50% components of animal origin) Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the 
company that 
issued controlled goods into circulation WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 398 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
42 from 2105 
00 Ice cream, except ice cream on 
fruits and berries basis, fruit and edible ice
2 veterinary 
certificate – for goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, for goods imported to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, – veterinary 
certificate  
(except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure 
is applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus The measure is 
applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation, 
inclusion in the registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
43 from 2106 Food products not elsewhere 
specified or included2 veterinary 
certificate – for 
goods imported 
into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, for goods imported to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, – veterinary certificate  (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure 
is applied to 
goods 
imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus The measure is 
applied to goods 
imported into 
the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is required, if company – manufacturer of sausage, meat, meat by-products, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or 
other aquatic 
invertebrates, or products of group 04 of EAEU HS Code or any combination of these products is not included in the registry WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 399 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
44 2301 Flours, meals and pellets, of 
meat or meat offal, of fish or of crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, unfit for human consumption; greaves (cracklings) veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
45 from 2302 Bran, sharps and other residues 
from sifting, milling or other working of cereals or legumes, granulated or non-granulated, used as animal feed
3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
46 from 2303 Residues of starch manufacture 
and similar residu es, beet-pulp, 
bagasse and other waste of sugar manufacture, brewing or distilling dreg s and waste, 
whether or not in the form of pellets, used as animal feed
3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
47 from 2304 
00 000 Oilcake and other solid residues, 
whether or not ground or in the form of pellets, resulting from the extraction of soybean oil, used as animal feed
3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
48 from 2306 cake and other solid residues, 
whether or not ground or in the 
form of pellets, resulting from 
the extraction of vegetable fats or oils, used as animal feed
3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not 
required, but the 
veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 400 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
49 2308 00 Vegetable materials and 
vegetable waste, vegetable residues and byproducts, whether or not in the form of pellets, of a kind used in animal feeding3 veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
50 2309 Products used in animal feeding veterinary 
certificate – for goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, veterinary certificate – for goods that contain ingredients of animal origin imported into the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Russian 
Federation yes (except for 
feed for cats, dogs, ferrets, ferret mustela furo, mustela, rodents, water aquarium and terrarium animals in the original packaging, thermally processed) Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
51 from group 
30 pharmaceutical products for 
veterinary medicine) No Measure is 
applied to goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, as well as unregistered goods imported from 
third countries 
to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation Inclusion to the 
Register is not required, but for non registered pharmaceutical products names and/or numbers of the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in the 
quality 
certificate for additives of chemical or microbiological synthesis  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 401 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
52 3101 00 
000 0 Fertilizers of animal or vegetable 
origin, mixed or unmixed, chemically treated or untreated; fertilizers produced by mixing or chemical treatment of products of animal or vegetable origin veterinary 
certificate – for goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, veterinary certificate – for goods that contain ingredients of animal origin imported into the 
territory of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation Yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but import permit and veterinary certificate for controlled products containing ingredients of animal origin should specify umber and (or) 
name of the 
company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
53 from 3501 Casein, caseinates and other 
casein derivatives;  veterinary 
certificate yes The measure is 
applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to  the territory 
of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
54 3502 Albumins (proteins) (including 
concentrates of two or more whey proteins, containing by weight more than 80 percent whey proteins, calculated on the dry matter), albuminates and other albumin derivatives veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation  WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 402 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
55 3503 00 Gelatin (including gelatin in 
rectangular (including square) sheets, whether or not surface-worked or colored) and gelatin derivatives; isinglass; other glues of animal origin veterinary 
certificate yes The measure is 
applied to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to  the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation, 
inclusion in the registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
56 3504 00 Peptones and their derivatives; 
other protein substances and 
their derivatives, not elsewhere 
specified or included; hide powder, whether or not chromed veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not 
required, but on 
the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
57 4101 Unprocessed raw hides of cattle 
(including buffalo) or equine animals (fresh or salted, dried, 
limed, pickled or otherwise 
preserved, but not tanned, parchment-dressed or not exposed to furthe r processing), 
with or without hair, whether or not split veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but on 
the import 
permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
58 4102 Unprocessed sheep and lamb 
hides (fresh or salted, dried, limed, pickled or otherwise preserved, but not tanned, 
parchment-dressed or not 
exposed to furthe r processing), 
with or without hair, whether or not split veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but on the import 
permit and 
veterinary certificate should include number and (or) WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 403 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
59 4103 Other processed hides (fresh or 
salted, dried, limed, pickled or 
otherwise preserved, but not tanned, parchment-dressed or not exposed to further processing), with or without hair, whether or not split veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not 
required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
60 4206 
00 000 0 Products from gut (other than 
silkworm gut), of goldbeater's 
skin, of bladders or of tendons  veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not 
required, but on 
the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
61 4301 Down and fur raw materials 
(including heads, tails, paws and other parts or cuttings, suitable 
for the production of fur) veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but on 
the import 
permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
62 5101 Wool not exposed to carding and 
combing veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but on the import 
permit and 
veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
63 5102 Fine or coarse animal hair, not 
carded or combed  veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 404 - 
 
  No. Group, HS 
code Description of goods Supporting 
documents Import 
permit 
(yes/no) Register of 
establishments 
of third 
countries 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
64 5103 Wastes of wool and fine or 
coarse animal hair, including textile wastes, but excluding pickled raw materials veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
65 from 9508 
10 000 0 Animals as part of traveling 
circuses and menageries veterinary 
certificate yes Inclusion in the 
registry is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
 
Note: In order to use this list, please us e both name of goods and EAEU HS code. 
_________________________ 
1 For epizootic well-being. 
2 Veterinary control in relation to finished food products containing no raw meat components or 
containing in its composition less than half of othe r processed product of animal origin, intended for the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, shall not be carried out, provided that such products are 
securely packaged or sealed in clean containers an d can be stored at room temperature or were fully 
prepared in the manufacturing process or were entire ly heat-treated till complete change of the natural 
properties of the raw product. 
3 Veterinary control in respect of goods intended for the Republ ic of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation shall not be carried out and none of the measures specified in columns 4 - 6 of this list shall apply.  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 405 - ANNEX 20 
List of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control 
No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
Measures applied upon accession of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the World Trade Organization 
1 0101 Live horses, asses, mules and hi nnies veterinary certificate or 
veterinary passport (for sport horses) yes no 
2 0102 Live cattle veterinary  certificate yes no 
3 0103 Live pigs veterinary  certificate yes no 
4 0104 Live sheep and goats veterinary certificate yes no 
5 0105 Live poultry, i.e fowls (Gallus domesticus), ducks, 
geese, turkeys and guinea fowls veterinary certificate yes no 
6 0106 Live animals, except those specified in positions 1 - 5 
of the present list veterinary certificate or veterinary passport (for dogs and cats imported for personal use in the quantity no more than 2 heads) Yes, except for dogs and 
cats imported for personal use in the quantity no more than 2 heads  no 
7 0201 Meat of cattle, fresh or cooled  veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
8 0202 Meat of cattle, frozen vete rinary certificate yes yes 
9 0203 Pork fresh, cooled or frozen ve terinary certificate yes yes 
10 0204 Lamb or chevon fresh, cooled or fro zen veterinary ce rtificate yes yes 
11 0205 00 Meat of horses, asses, mules or hinnies, fresh, cooled 
or frozen veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
12 0206 Edible offal of cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, asses, 
mules or hinnies, fresh, cooled or frozen veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
13 0207 Meat and edible offal of poultry specified in position 5 
of present list, fresh, cooled or frozen veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
14 0208 Others meat and edible offal, fresh, chilled or frozen, 
except specified in positions 7 – 13 of the present list  veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
15 0209 Pig fat, free of lean meat, an d poultry fat, not rendered 
or otherwise extracted, fre sh, chilled, frozen, salted1, in 
brine1, dried1 or smoked1 veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
16 0210 Meat and edible meat offal, salted1, in brine1, dried1 or 
smoked1; edible flours of meat or meat offal veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
17 from 0301 Live fish intended for human consum ption veterinary ce rtificate yes yes  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 406 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
18 from 0301 Live fish intended for breed ing in decorative purposes, 
including aquarium fish, and not intended for human consumption veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
19 0302 Fish, fresh or chilled, excluding fish fillets and other 
fish meat specified in position 21 of present list veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
20 0303 Fish, frozen, excluding fish fillets and other fish meat 
specified in position 21 of present list veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
21 0304 Fish fillets and other fish meat (including minced), 
fresh, cooled or frozen veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
22 0305 Fish, dried, salted or in br ine; smoked fish, whether or 
not cooked before or during the smoking process1; 
flours, meals and pellets of fish, fit for human consumption
1 veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
23 0306 Crustaceans, whether in shell or not, live, fresh, 
chilled, frozen, dried 1, salted1 o r  i n  b r i n e1; smoked 
crustaceans, whether in shell or not, whether or not cooked before or during the smoking process
 1; 
crustaceans, in shell, cooked by steaming1 or by 
boiling1 in water, whether or not chilled, frozen, dried1, 
salted1 or in brine1; flours, meals and pellets of 
crustaceans, fit fo r human consumption1 veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
24 0307 Mollusks, whether in shell or not, live, fresh, chilled, 
frozen, dried1, salted1 or in brine1; smoked mollusks, 
whether in shell or not, whether or not cooked before or during the smoking process
1; flours, meals and 
pellets of mollusks, fit for human consumption1 veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
25 0308 Aquatic invertebrates other than crustaceans and 
mollusks, live, fresh, chilled, frozen, dried1, salted1 or 
in brine1; aquatic invertebrates other than crustaceans 
and mollusks, smoked, whether or not cooked before or during smoking process
1; flours, meals and pellets 
of aquatic invertebrates other than crustaceans and mollusks, fit for human consumption
1  veterinary cert ificate yes yes  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 407 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
26 from 0401 Milk and cream, not concentr ated nor containing added 
sugar or other sweetening matter (except raw milk and 
raw cream) veterinary certificate 
 yes The measure applies to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic 
of Belarus. In respect of 
goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
27 from 0401 Raw milk and raw cream vete rinary certificate yes yes 
28 0402 Milk and cream, concentrated or containing added 
sugar or other sweetening matter 1 veterinary certificate 
 yes The measure applies to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  
company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 408 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
29 0403 Buttermilk, curdled milk and cream, yogurt, kefir and 
other fermented or acidified milk and cream, whether or not concentrated or containing added sugar or other sweetening matter or flav ored or containing added 
fruit, nuts or cocoa
1 veterinary certificate yes The measure applies to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic 
of Belarus. In respect of 
goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
30 0404 Whey, whether or not conc entrated or containing 
added sugar or other sweetening matter; products consisting of natural milk constituents, whether or not 
containing added sugar or other sweetening matter
1 veterinary certificate yes The measure applies to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 409 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
31 0405 Butter and others fats and oils derived from milk1; 
dairy spreads1 veterinary certificate yes The measure applies to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic 
of Belarus. In respect of 
goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
32 from 0406 Cheese and curd1 other than processed cheese 
containing sausage, meat, meat offal, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, or the products of group 04 EAEU HS or any combination of these products
2 veterinary certificate yes The measure applies to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 410 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
33 from 0406 Processed cheese containing sausage, meat, meat 
offal, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, or the products of group 04 EAEU HS or any combination of these products
2 veterinary certificate – for 
goods, imported to the territory of the Republic of Belarus, for goods imported to 
the territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, – veterinary certificate (excep t for products 
containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure applies to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus The measure applies to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic 
of Belarus. In respect of 
goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion into the register is required, if company – manufacturer of sausage, meat, meat by-products, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, or products of group 04 of EAEU HS Code or any combination of these products is not included in the registry 
34 0407 Birds' eggs, in shell, fresh, preserved1 or cooked1 veterinary certificate yes The measure applies to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion into the register is required only for processed egg products  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 411 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
35 0408 Birds' eggs, not in shell, and egg yolks, fresh, dried, 
cooked by steaming1 or by boiling1 in water, molded1, 
frozen or otherwise preserved1, whether or not 
containing added sugar or other sweetening matter veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
36 0409 00 000 0 Natural honey  veterinary certificate The measure applies to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus no 
37 0410 00 000 0 Food products of animal origin, not elsewhere specified 
or included veterinary certificate yes no 
38 0502 Pork or boar bristle, badge r or other bristle used for 
brush making; their wastes veterinary certificate yes no 
39 0504 00 000 0 intestines, bladders and st omachs of animals (other 
than fish), whole and lumped, fresh, chilled, frozen, salted, in brine, dried or smoked veterinary certificate yes The measure applies to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the 
territory of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
40 0505 Hides and other parts of bird s with feathers or down, 
feathers, parts of feathers 
(with trimmed or not tr immed edges) and down, 
cleaned, disinfected or treated for preservation, but not 
exposed to further processi ng; powder and wastes of 
feathers or parts thereof veterinary certificate yes no 
41 0506 Bones and horn pith, unpro cessed, defatted, exposed 
to primary processing (without shaping), treated with acid or de-gelled; powder and wastes thereof veterinary certificate yes no  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 412 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
42 from 0507 Ivory, tortoise shell, bone of a whale or other marine 
mammals, horns, antlers, hooves, nails, claws and beaks, unprocessed or expo sed to primary processing 
(without shaping); powder and wastes thereof veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
43 0510 00 000 0 Ambergris, castor, civet and musk; Spanish fly; bile, 
including dried; glands and other products of original 
origin used in the manufacture of pharmaceutical products, fresh, chilled,  frozen or otherwise 
provisionally preserved for short-term storage veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
44 0511 Products of animal origin, not included in other EAEU 
HS positions; dead animals of group 01 EAEU HS or 03 EAEU HS, unfit for human consumption veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
45 0511 99 859 2 Horsehair and wastes thereof, including in the form of 
wadding with or without substrate  veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 413 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
46 from 0511, from 
9601, from 9705 00 
000 0 Hunter's trophies, stuffed an imals, including exposed to 
taxidermy treatment or preserved veterinary certificate (only for 
untreated (canned) hunting trophies) No - for those past 
complete taxidermy treatment Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate (if 
necessary) should 
include the name of taxidermist workshop where primary processing of trophies was performed, or hunting entity 
47 from 1001 19 000 0 Hard wheat (only forage grain) 3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
48 from 1001 99 000 0 Soft wheat (only forage grain) 3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
49 from 1002 90 000 0 Rye (only forage grain) 3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 414 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
50 from 1003 90 000 0 Barley (only forage grain) 3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  
company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
51 from 1004 90 000 0 Oat (only forage grain) 3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
52 from 1005 90 000 0 Corn (only forage grain) 3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
53 from 1201 90 000 0 Soybeans (only forage grain) 3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
54 from 1208 flours, meals and pellets of oil seeds (except mustard 
seeds) intended for feeding animals3  veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 415 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
55 from 1211 Plants and parts thereof (including seeds and fruits), 
used in veterinary, fresh or dried, whole or milled, crushed
3 veterinary certificate – upon 
declaration the use of veterinary products, including animal feed yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  
company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
56 from  1212 99 950 0 Bee bread, pollen veterinary certificate The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
57 1213 00 000 0 Cereal straw and husks, unprepared, whether or not 
chopped, ground, pressed or  in the form of pellets3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
58 1214 Rutabagas, leaf beat (man gold), fodder roots, hay, 
alfalfa (lucerne), clover, sainfoin, forage kale, lupines, vetches and similar forage pr oducts, whether or not in 
the form of pellets
3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
59 from 1301 90 000 0 Propolis  veterinary certificate The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 416 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
60 1501 Pig fat (including lard) and poultry fat, other than that 
of position 15 and 62  veterinary certificate – only for 
controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not 
subjected to disinfection 
treatment yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
61 1502 Fats of bovine animals, sheep or goats, other than 
those of position 62  veterinary certificate – only for 
controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
62 1503 00 Lard stearin, lard oil, oleostearin, oleo-oil and tallow 
oil, not emulsified or mixed or otherwise prepared veterinary certificate – only for 
controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
63 1504 Fats and oils and their frac tions, of fish or marine 
mammals, whether or not re fined, but not chemically 
modified veterinary certificate – only for 
controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 417 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
64 1505 00 Grease and fatty substances derived therefrom 
(including lanolin) veterinary certificate – only for 
controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not 
subjected to disinfection 
treatment The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
65 1506 00 000 0 Other animal fats and oils and their fractions, whether 
or not refined, but no t chemically modified veterinary certificate – only for 
controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
66 1516 10 Animal fats and oils and their fractions, partly or wholly 
hydrogenated, inter-esterified, re-esterified or elaidinized, whether or not refined, but not exposed to 
further processing veterinary certificate – only for 
controlled products of animal origin intended for food and feed purposes and not subjected to disinfection treatment The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
67 1516 20 Vegetable fats and oils and their fractions, partly or 
wholly hydrogenated, inter-esterified, re-esterified or elaidinized, whether or not refined, but not exposed to 
further processing
3 veterinary certificate – only 
upon declaration the use of products in animal feed  yes no  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 418 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
68 1518 00 Animal or vegetable fats and oils and their fractions, 
boiled, oxidized, dehydrated, sulfurized, blown, polymerized by heat in vacuum or in inert gas or otherwise chemically modified, excluding those of 
heading 1516; inedible mixtures or preparations of 
animal or vegetable fats or oils or of fractions of different fats or oils  veterinary certificate (when 
declaring the use of products in veterinary, including in animal feed) – for goods 
imported into the territory of 
the Republic of Belarus, for goods imported to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, - veterinary certificate (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, as well as upon 
import to the territory of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of goods, specified in this position, except for the vegetable fats Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
69 1521 90 Bee wax, other insect waxes and spermaceti, whether 
or not refined or colored veterinary certificate yes no 
70 1601 00 Sausages and similar products, of meat, meat offal or 
blood1; food preparations based on these products1 veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
71 1602 Other prepared or preserve d products of meat, meat 
offal or blood1 veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
72 1603 00 Extracts and juices of me at, fish or crustaceans, 
mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
73 1604 Prepared or preserved fish1; sturgeon roe and its 
substitutes prepar ed from fish eggs1 veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
74 1605 Crustaceans, mollusks and other aquatic invertebrates, 
prepared or preserved1 veterinary cert ificate yes yes 
75 from 1902 20 Stuffed pasta, whether or not cooked or otherwise 
prepared, containing fish, crustaceans, mollusks or 
other aquatic invertebrate s, sausages, meat, meat 
offal, blood, or the products of heading 04, or any combination of these products
2 veterinary certificate  
(except for products containing 
less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 419 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
76 from 1904 20 Cereals (except corn) in the fo rm of grain or flakes or 
otherwise treated (except flour, fine and meal ), pre-cooked or otherwise 
prepared, containing fish, crustaceans, mollusks or 
other aquatic invertebrate s, sausages, meat, meat 
offal, blood, or the products of heading 04, or any combination of these produkts
2 veterinary certificate  
(except for products containing 
less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus (except for 
products containing less 
than 50% components of animal origin) Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  
company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
77 from group 20 Derivatives of vegetables, fruit, nuts or other parts of 
plants and mixtures thereof, containing sausage, meat, meat offal, blood, fish or crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, or products of heading 04, 
or any combination of these products
2 veterinary certificate  
(except for products containing 
less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
78 from 2102 20 Inactive yeasts3; other dead single-cell microorganisms 
used as animal feed3 veterinary certificate yes no 
79 from 2104 Soups and broths and preparations therefor; 
homogenized composite food preparations (except vegetable) homogenized co mposite food products 
containing sausage, meat, meat offal, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, or the products of heading 04 HS or any combination these produkts
2 veterinary certificate  
(except for products containing 
less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 420 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
80 from 2105 00 Ice cream, except ice cream on fruits and berries basis, 
fruit and edible ice2 veterinary certificate – for 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, for goods imported to 
the territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, – veterinary certificate  (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus The measure is applied 
to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In 
respect of goods 
imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
81 from 2106 Food products not elsewhere specified or included2 veterinary certificate – for 
goods imported into the 
territory of the Republic of Belarus, for goods imported to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, – veterinary certificate  (except for products containing less than 50% components of animal origin) The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the 
territory of the Republic of Belarus The measure is applied 
to goods imported into 
the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is required, if company – manufacturer of sausage, meat, meat by-products, blood, fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, or products of group 04 of EAEU HS Code or any combination of these products is not included in the registry  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 421 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
82 2301 Flours, meals and pellets, of me at or meat offal, of fish 
or of crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, unfit for human consumption; greaves (cracklings) veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
83 from 2302 Bran, sharps and other residu es from sifting, milling or 
other working of cereals or legumes, granulated or non-granulated, used as animal feed
3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
84 from 2303 Residues of starch manufacture and similar residues, 
beet-pulp, bagasse and other waste of sugar manufacture, brewing or di stilling dregs and waste, 
whether or not in the form of  pellets, used as animal 
feed
3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
85 from 2304 00 000 Oilcake and other solid re sidues, whether or not 
ground or in the form of pellets, resulting from the 
extraction of soybean oil, used as animal feed3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the 
veterinary certificate 
should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
86 from 2306 cake and other solid residues, whether or not ground 
or in the form of pellets, resulting from the extraction of vegetable fats or oils, used as animal feed
3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 422 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
87 2308 00 Vegetable materials and ve getable waste, vegetable 
residues and byproducts, whet her or not in the form of 
pellets, of a kind used in animal feeding3 veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  
company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
88 2309 Products used in animal feedin g veterinary certificate – for 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, veterinary certificate – for goods that contain ingredients of animal origin imported into the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation yes (except for feed for 
cats, dogs, ferrets, ferret mustela furo, mustela, rodents, water aquarium and terrarium animals in the original packaging, thermally processed) Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
89 from group 29 Organic chemical compounds (for veterinary medicine)3 no yes no 
90 from group 30 pharmaceutical products for veterinary  medicine) No Measure is applied to 
goods imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, as well as unregistered 
goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but the number of unregistered pharmaceutical products and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation should be specified in the import permit and (or) 
quality certificate for 
additives of chemical or microbiological synthesis  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 423 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
91 3101 00 000 0 Fertilizers of animal or vegetable origin, mixed or 
unmixed, chemically treated or untreated; fertilizers produced by mixing or chemical treatment of products of animal or vegetable origin veterinary certificate – for 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, veterinary certificate – 
for goods that contain 
ingredients of animal origin imported into the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation Yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but import permit and veterinary certificate for 
controlled products 
containing ingredients of animal origin should specify umber and (or) name of the company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
92 from 3501 Casein, caseinates and other casein derivatives;  veterinary certificate yes The measure is applied 
to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In respect of goods imported from third countries to  the territory of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the 
Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
93 3502 Albumins (proteins) (including concentrates of two or 
more whey proteins, containing by weight more than 80 percent whey proteins, calculated on the dry matter), albuminates and other albumin derivatives veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  
company that issued controlled goods into circulation   
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 424 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
94 3503 00 Gelatin (including gelatin in rectangular (including 
square) sheets, whether or not surface-worked or colored) and gelatin derivatives; isinglass; other glues of animal origin veterinary certificate ye s The measure is applied 
to goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In 
respect of goods 
imported from third countries to  the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, inclusion in the registry is not required, but the veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
95 3504 00 Peptones and their deri vatives; other protein 
substances and their deri vatives, not elsewhere 
specified or included; hide  powder, whether or not 
chromed veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on 
the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
96 from 3507 Ferments (enzymes)3; ferment preparations (for use in 
veterinary)3  no yes no 
97 from 3808 Insecticides, rodenticides, disinfectants and similar 
products, put up in forms or packaging for retail sale or as preparations or articles (for the use in veterinary 
medicine) no measure applies to goods 
imported from third countries into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, as well as unregistered 
goods imported from third countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation no 
98 3821 00 000 0 Prepared culture media for development or 
maintenance of microorganisms (including viruses and the like) or of plant, human or animal cells
3 no yes no  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 425 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
99 from 3822 00 000 0 Diagnostic or laboratory reagents on a backing and 
prepared diagnostic or laboratory reagents, whether or not on a backing; certified reference materials (for the 
use in veterinary medicine) no The measure is applied to 
goods imported into the territory of the Republic of Belarus, in respect of 
goods imported from third 
countries to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, measure is applied to the appropriate technical regulations no 
100 4101 Unprocessed raw hides of catt le (including buffalo) or 
equine animals (fresh or salted, dried, limed, pickled or otherwise preserved, but not tanned, parchment-dressed or not exposed to fu rther processing), with or 
without hair, whether or not split veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into 
circulation 
101 4102 Unprocessed sheep and lamb hides (fresh or salted, 
dried, limed, pickled or ot herwise preserved, but not 
tanned, parchment-dressed or not exposed to further processing), with or withou t hair, whether or not split veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
102 4103 Other processed hide s (fresh or salted, dried, limed, 
pickled or otherwise preserved, but not tanned, parchment-dressed or not exposed to further processing), with or withou t hair, whether or not split veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 426 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
103 4206 00 000 0 Products from gut (other than silkworm gut), of 
goldbeater's skin, of bladders or of tendons  veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
104 4301 Down and fur raw materials (including heads, tails, 
paws and other parts or cuttings, suitable for the production of fur) veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
105 5101 Wool not exposed to carding and combing veterina ry certificate yes Incl usion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
106 5102 Fine or coarse animal hair, not carded or combed  veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 427 - No. Group, HS code Description of goods Supporting documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of third 
countries enterprises 
(yes/no) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
107 5103 Wastes of wool and fine or coarse animal hair, 
including textile wastes, but excluding pickled raw materials veterinary certificate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate 
should include number 
a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
108 from 9508 10 000 0 Animals as part of traveling circus es and menageries veterinary certif icate yes Inclusion in the registry 
is not required, but on the import permit and veterinary certificate should include number a n d  ( o r )  n a m e  o f  t h e  company that issued controlled goods into circulation 
109 from 9705 00 000 0 Collections and coll ectors' pieces of zoology, anatomy 
and paleontology (except for the museum exhibits) veterinary certificate yes no 
110 from 3923, 
from 3926, 
from 4415, 
from 4416 00 000 0,  
from 4421, 
from 7020 00, from 7309 00, 
from 7310, 
from 7326, from 7616, 
8436 10 000 0, 
from 8436 21 000 0,
 
from 8436 29 000 0,  
from 8436 80 900 0, from 8606 91 800 0,
 
from 8609 00, 
from 8716 39 800 Equipment and supplies for transportation, breeding, 
temporary overexposure of animals of all kinds, as well as equipment for the transportation of pre-used raw materials (products) of animal origin No (document of the 
authorized body of the exporting country - in the case of complex epizootic situation) yes (in the case of 
complex epizootic situation additional requirements are also specified) no 
 
Note: In order to use this list, please us e both name of goods and EAEU HS code.  
  WT/ACC/KAZ/93  
 
- 428 - _________________________ 
1 For epizootic well-being. 
2 Veterinary control in relation to finished  food products containing no raw meat comp onents or containing in its composition le ss than half of other processed product of 
animal origin, intended for the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Ru ssian Federation, shall not be carried out, provided that such  products are securely packaged or sealed in clean 
containers and can be stored at room temper ature or were fully prepared in the manufac turing process or were entirely heat-trea ted till complete change of the natural properties 
of the raw product. 
3 Veterinary control in re spect of goods intended for the Re public of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation shall not be carried  out and none of the measures specified 
in columns 4 - 6 of this list shall apply. 
 
 
_______________ WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 429 - 
 
  ANNEX 21 
SEZs Operating under Law No. 469-IV "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 21 July 2011 
SEA/SEZ Establishing Legisl ation Time-frame Purpose 
Astana – 
New City Decree  of the President 
No. 645  of 29 June 2001  The period 
2002-2027 To facilitate the development of the 
capital of Kazakhstan by attracting investments, building public facilities, real estate and modern infrastructure based on advanced construction technologies, an d creation of 
competitive industries 
Aktau Seaport 
(in Mangistau oblast) Decree  of the President 
No. 853  of 26 April 2002 The period 
2003-2028 To facilitate the development of the 
seaport infrastructure and its auxiliary services by attracting new investments, creating new jobs and introducing modern administration and management methods 
Innovation Technologies Park (in Almaty oblast) Decree  of the President 
No. 1166 of 18 August 2003 Until 2028 To diversify the economy through the 
production of information technology (IT) products and the effective use of the country's scientific and technical innovation capacity 
Ontustyk (in South-Kazakhstan oblast) Decree  of the President 
No. 1605 of 6 July 2005 Until 1 July 2030 To diversify the economy by creating 
jobs and attracting foreign investment through the development of the textile industry (cotton) in southern Kazakhstan 
National Industrial Petrochemical Techno-Park (in Atyrau oblast) Decree  of the President 
No. 495  of 19 December 2007 Until 
31 December 2032 To develop and implement 
"breakthrough" investment projects aimed at developing an internationally 
competitive deep hydrocarbon processing and high value-added petrochemica l products 
Burabai (in  
Akmola oblast) Decree  of the President 
No. 512 of 15 January 2008 Until 
1 December 2017 to develop an effici ent and competitive 
tourism infrastructure 
Saryarka (in Karaganda oblast) Decree of the President 
No. 181 of 24 November 2011  Until 
1 December 2036 To develop metallurgical industry  
Pavlodar 
(in Pavlodar oblast) Decree of the President 
No. 186 of 29 November 2011  Until 
1 December 2036 To develop chemical and  metallurgical 
industries  
Horgos-East Gates (in Almaty oblast) Decree of the President 
No. 187 of 29 November 2011 Until 2035 To develop Kazakhstan's transport 
infrastructure and transit capacity through construction of logistics centre in the SEZ 
Chemical Park Taraz (in Jambyl oblast) Decree of the President No. 
426 of 13 November 2012  Until 2037 To develop сhemical industry 
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 430 - 
 
  ANNEX 22(A) 
List of Goods, Works and Services Covere d by Government Proc urement by Auction 
1. Agricultural products, hunting products, agri cultural and hunting services, other than live 
animals, products and services related to hunting, fishing and bird breeding; 
2. Forest and logging products, forestry and logging services; 
3. Fishing products, fish hatcheries and fi sh farms, services related to fishing; 
4. Coal and lignite, peat 
5. Crude oil and natural gas, services for th eir extraction, other than exploratory works; 
6. Metallic ores; 7. Stone, clay, sand and other types of minerals; 8. Food products and beverage; 
9. Tobacco and other products of the tobacco industry; 
10. Textiles; 11. Clothing, fur and fur goods, except for children's clothing; 
12. Leather and leather goods, saddler goods and footwear; 
13. Wood, wood goods, cork, straw and plai ting materials, except for furniture; 
14. Pulp, paper, paperboard and articles thereof; 
15. Printed and published materials, except advertisements, drawings, designs, printed 
photos, souvenir and gift sets (pads and notebooks), election and referendum ballots; 
16. Coke ovens products; 17. Refined petroleum products, petroleum-refinery and pyrolysis gas, products of gas 
processing plants; 
18. Products of organic and inorganic synthesis; 19. Rubber and plastic products; 
20. Other non-metallic mineral products, except for household and interior glass products, as 
well as non-structural non-refractory ceramic ware products; 
21. Production of metallurgical industry; 
22. Metal products, except for machinery and equipment (other than nuclear reactors); 
23. Machinery and equipment not included in ot her groups, except for weapons, ammunition 
and their parts, explosive devices and explosives for household purposes; 
24. Office, accounting and computing machinery; 
25. Electric motors and electrical equipment, not included in other groups; 
26. Equipment and instruments for radio, television and communication; 27. Medical equipment, measuring equipment, photo and video equipment, clocks; 
28. Motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers, car bodies, parts and accessories for 
automobiles, garage equipment; 
29. Other vehicles except for trade and passenger ships, warships, aircraft and space vehicles, 
equipment and parts of aircraft; 
30. Finished products, except for jewelry, an d related products, musical instruments, games 
and toys, equipment for training processe s, textbooks and school equipment, craft 
products, artworks and collectibles, exposed film; human, animal and synthetic hair and 
articles thereof; 
31. Waste and scrap used as raw materia; 32. Natural water and ice; 
33. Construction services and construction projects, including major and minor repair, except 
for technically complicated construction projects (including major and minor repairs), a list of which is established in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
architecture, urban planning and construction activities;  
34. Trade services, services for maintenance and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles. 35. Wholesale and commission trade services, exce pt for trade services of motor vehicles and 
motorcycles; 
36. Retail trade services; 
37. Hotel and restaurant services; 38. Land transport services, except for railway transport services, underground services, 
pipeline transportation services; 
39. Water transport services; 40. Ancillary transport services and ancillary serv ices in the sphere of tourism and excursion, 
except for travel and tourist agencies services, other assistance services to tourists. 
41. Communications services, except for courier services, other than national post services, 
telecommunications services; WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 431 - 
 
  42. Financial intermediation services, except for insurance and pension funding, bond issue 
services; 
43. Ancillary services to financial intermediati on services, except for evaluation services; 
44. Services related to real estate; 
45. Services for the maintenance and repair of  office equipment, electronic computers and 
other equipment used in conjunction with office equipment; 
46. Cleaning services; 
47. Packaging services; 
48. Sewage and waste disposal services, sanitation and other like services; 49. Housing and communal services except for hairdressers, beauty salons and cosmetic 
medical institutions and funeral, burial and cremation services; 
50. Services related to the activities in the manufacturing sector, except for coke production 
services, refined petroleum products and nuclear fuel, furniture production services, equipment maintenance services, not included in this list. 
 
Source: Approved by Resolution of  the Government of th e Republic of Kazakhstan No. 339 of 19 March 2012. 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 432 - 
 
  ANNEX 22(B) 
The List of Goods and Services for Daily or Weekly Needs which Are Purchased by 
Customers in Order to Ensure Non-Stop Ac tivity, as well as Procurement from One 
Source for the Period until Results of a Tender Are Announced, and the Government 
Procurement Contracts Enter into Force 
1. Food stuffs; 
2. Fuels and lubricants; 
3. Paper A-4, A-3; 
4. Works on maintenance of roads in winter season; 
5. Catering services; 
6. Services of burial of lonely citizens and citizens without relatives; 
7. Bath and laundry services; 
8. Motor transport services; 
9. Installation, assembly, repair and operation of means of traffic control; 
10. Service on maintenance of office buildings:      
 (1) cleaning inside offices and facade of the building and in the surrounding area;  
 (2) urban land improvement and landscaping of surrounding area, and maintenance of 
  plants inside the buildings; 
 (3) sanitation inside of the buildings and in the surrounding area;    (4) removal of garbage and snow from the surrounding area;  
(5) custodial services, provision with signal systems and other devices for the 
protection of buildings, fire safety and in  the surrounding areas of the buildings; 
11. Communication services (including Internet, satellite, telephone, courier mail service); 
12. Services in support of information systems; 
13. Services on publication of information in the media; 
14. Services for the maintenance of fire fighting systems and air conditioning of server rooms; 
15. Services on hardware and software system-maintenance; 
16. Services for conduction of a scientific expertise of draft laws, regulations and concepts of 
the draft laws; 
17. Services for the production of Collected Acts of central executive and other state bodies of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
Source: Approved by Resolution of  the Government of th e Republic of Kazakhstan No. 341 of 19 March 2012. 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 433 - 
 
  ANNEX 22(C) 
The List of Commodity Exchange Goods and Minimum Limits of Provided Lots of  
Goods, which Are Realized through Commodity Exchange 
No. Short name of commodity HS Code of CU  Minimum 
limits of 
provided lots 
of goods 
1 2 3 4 
1. Fresh or refrigerated potato: others 0701 90 900 0 60 tonnes 
2. Wheat and meslin:  other dink el wheat, soft wheat and other 
meslin** 1001 91 990 0, 
1001 99 000 0 600 tonnes 
3. Barley: others** 1003 90 000 0 600 tonnes 
4. Crashed or non-crashed soybean: others 1201 90 000 0 600 tonnes 
5. White sugar 1701 99 100 60 tonnes 
6. Portland cement, aluminous 
cement, slag cement, supersulphate and like hydraulic cements, either in manu factured form or in the form 
of clinkers 2523 60 tonnes 
7. Coal, briquettes, fuels pellet and similar solid 
fuels manufactured from stone coal* 2701 3,000 tonnes 
8. Lignite or brown coal, 
agglomerated or not agglomerated, except for jet* 2702 3,000 tonnes 
9. Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons: LPG: 
propane 2711 12 100 tonnes 
10. Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons: LPG: 
butanes 2711 13 100 tonnes 
11. Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons: LPG: 
others 2711 19 000 0 100 tonnes 
12. Cotton fiber, carded or combed 5203 00 000 0 600 tonnes 
* Applied for the procurement by municipal juridical persons since 1 January 2013 
** The list is not applied to  State resources of grain 
Source: Approved by Resolution of  the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 375 of 6 April 2011.  
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 434 - 
 
  ANNEX 23 
Prices for works and services of the Republic an State Enterprise "National Institute of 
Intellectual Property" of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
 
1. Activities in the field of protection of inventions, utility models and industrial designs  
No. Names for works and 
services according to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 Price (KZT excluding VAT) 
For juridical persons For natu ral persons For participants 
and invalids of the Great Patriotic War, invalids, students of secondary schools and university students  
1 2 3 4 5 
1 Receipt of applications and 
formal examination for invention:    
 1)  for paper application 18143 5443 363 
 2)  for electronic 
application 15421 4626 308 
2 Receipt of applications and 
examination for utility model:    
 1)  for paper application 14688 4406 294 
 2)  for electronic application 12484 3745 250 
3 Receipt of applications and 
formal examination for 
industrial design:    
 1)  for paper application 16107 4832 322 
 2)  for electronic 
application 13691 4107 274 
4 Processing, verification and 
transmission of international application 9165 9165 9165 
5 Processing, verification and 
transmission of Eurasian application 4018 4018 4018 
6 Substantive examination of 
application for invention 59785 17936 1196 
7 Substantive examination 
additionally for each independent point of the formula 47785 14335 956 
8 Substantive examination of 
application for industrial design 32861 9858 657 
9 Substantive examination for 
each additional industrial design  3913 1174 78 
10 Introduction of amendments 
into  documents of application  4665 1400 93 
11 Introduction of similar 
amendments into documents of application 3714 1114 74 
12 Conversion of application for  
invention and /or utility 
model 7795 2338 156 
13 Preparation of documents for 
issuance of protection document, publication of data on granting of protection document 29691 8907 594 
14 Issuance of author certificate  29691 8907 594 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 435 - 
 
  1. Activities in the field of protection of inventions, utility models and industrial designs  
No. Names for works and 
services according to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
"Patent Law of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 Price (KZT excluding VAT) 
For juridical persons For natu ral persons For participants 
and invalids of the Great Patriotic War, invalids, students of secondary schools and university students  
1 2 3 4 5 
15 Issuance of author certificate 
duplicate  10371 3111 207 
16 Issuance of duplicate annex 
to author certificate  5362 1608 107 
17 Amendments to protection 
document, state registers of inventions, utility models, industrial designs 13023 3907 260 
18 Similar amendments to 
protection do cument, state 
registers of inventions, utility models, industrial designs 4111 1233 82 
19 Provision of an extract from 
the state registry of inventions, utility models, industrial designs 4353 1306 87 
20 Extension of protection 
document and publication of information on extension:   
  
 1)  innovation patent for 
invention, provisional patent for invention and industrial design, patent for utility model and industrial design 2935 880 59 
 2)  patent for invention 7689 2307 154 
21 Restoration of validity term 
of protection document and publication of information on  restoration of protection document 10089 3027 202 
22 Receipt of applications 
claiming conventional priority after the deadline 19753 5926 395 
23 Transformation of  
international application into national phase 5853 1756 117 
24 Extension of deadline for 
submission of translation of application documents into Kazakh or Russian languages 5853 1756 117 
25 Conduction of information 
search in order to define the state of art and assess  patentability of an invention, utility model and industrial design 43505 13051 870 
26 Extension of deadline for 
submission of required documents for each month up to twelve months from the date of expiry of the deadline 7795 2338 156 
27 Restoration of the terms for 
submission of reply to examination request and provision of payment   28156 8447 563 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 436 - 
 
  1. Activities in the field of protection of inventions, utility models and industrial designs  
No. Names for works and 
services according to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
"Patent Law of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 Price (KZT excluding VAT) 
For juridical persons For natu ral persons For participants 
and invalids of the Great Patriotic War, invalids, students of secondary schools and university students  
1 2 3 4 5 
28 Examination of contract on 
assignment of protection documents and publication of information on registration of the contract 40179 40179 40179 
29 Examination of contract on 
assignment of the right to receive protection documents 
and publication of 
information on registration of the contract 9032 9032 9032 
30 Examination of licence 
(sublicence) contract, pledge contract, acceptance of application for registration of expertise of contract on provision of pa ckage business 
licence in respect of one or group of industrial property objects, publication of data on registration of contracts 40179 40179 40179 
31 Acceptance of application for 
open licence 11607 11607 11607 
32 Examination of 
supplementary contract and publication of information on its registration 11607 11607 11607 
33 Search of patent 
documentation:    
 1)  numeric 670 201 13 
 2)  nominal 996 299 20 
34 Consideration of application 
with participation of the applicant 1518 1518 1518 
35 Creation of copy of 
application (priority document) 2438 731 49 
36 Creation of paper copies of 
documents:  
  
  
 
 1)  production of copy of 
application documents and of cited document (1 sided sheet) 27 27 27 
 2)  production of copy of 
application documents and of cited document (1 double-sided sheet) 36 36 36 
37 Transfer of payments (one 
payment) 491 491 491 
38 Confirmation of payments 
(one payment) 491 491 491 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 437 - 
 
  1. Activities in the field of protection of inventions, utility models and industrial designs  
No. Names for works and 
services according to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
"Patent Law of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 Price (KZT excluding VAT) 
For juridical persons For natu ral persons For participants 
and invalids of the Great Patriotic War, invalids, students of secondary schools and university students  
1 2 3 4 5 
39 Databases of protection 
documents of the Republic of Kazakhstan:  
  
  
 1)  full-text database 
"Protection documents on inventions and utility models" (1 item, 1 year) 30804 30804 30804 
for educational institutions - 21,565 
 2)  bibliographic database 
"Protection documents" (1 item, 1 year) 21071 21071 21071 
40 Official bulletin "Industrial 
Property" Part 1 (1 issue) 1491 1491 1491 
41 Official bulletin "Industrial 
Property" Part 2 (1 issue) 2946 2946 2946 
42 Official Bulletin "Industrial 
Property" on CD-ROM (electronic version) (1 CD) 2679 2679 2679 
 
2. Activities in the field of selection achievements  
No. Names for works and 
services according to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 Price (KZT excluding VAT) 
For juridical persons For natural 
persons For participants 
and invalids of the Great Patriotic War, invalids, 
students of 
secondary schools and university students 
1 2 3 4 5 
43 Receipt of applications and 
preliminary examination of applications for selection 
achievement:    
 1)  for paper application   10036 3011 201 
 2)  for electronic application 8530 2559 171 
44 Introduction of amendments 
into documents of application 4665 1400 93 
45 Preparation of protection 
documents, issuance of author certificate, publication of information on issuance of protection documents 29691 8907 594 
46 Issuance of author 
certificate duplicate  10371 3111 207 
47 Duplicate applications to the 
identity of the author 5362 1608 107 
48 Introduction of amendments 
into protection document and state registers on protected plant varieties and animal breeds 13023 3907 260 
49 Provision of an extract from 
state register on selection achievements 4353 1306 87 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 438 - 
 
  2. Activities in the field of selection achievements  
No. Names for works and 
services according to the Law of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan "Patent Law of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999 Price (KZT excluding VAT) 
For juridical persons For natural 
persons For participants 
and invalids of the Great Patriotic War, invalids, students of secondary schools and university students 
1 2 3 4 5 
50 Extension of protection 
document and publication of information on extension 2935 880 59 
51 Examination of contract on 
patent assignment and publication of information on registration of the contract 40179 40179 40179 
52 Examination of contract on 
assignment of the right to receive patent for selection achievement and publication of information on registration of the contract 9032 9032 9032 
53 Examination of licence 
(sublicence) contract, pledge contract, publication of data 
on registration of contract 40179 40179 40179 
54 Reciept of application for 
open licence 11607 11607 11607 
55 Examination of 
supplementary contract and publication of information on its registration 11607 11607 11607 
56 Creation of paper copies of 
documents:    
 1)  production of copy of 
application documents (1-sided sheet) 27 27 27 
 2)  production of copy of  
application documents (1 double-sided sheet) 36 36 36 
57 Transfer of payments (one 
payment) 491 491 491 
58 Confirmation of payments 
(one payment) 491 491 491 
 
3. Payments for maintenance of protection documents  
1) protection document for invention (Eurasian patent)  
One year of protection 
document maintenance from the date of application Price (KZT excluding VAT) 
For juridical persons For natura l persons For participants and 
invalids of the Great Patriotic War, invalids, students of secondary schools and university students 
 After the 
specified date, but not later than six months from the date of its expiration  After the 
specified date, but not later than six months from the date of its expiration  After the 
specified date, but not later than six months from the date of its expiration 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
First 18143 27214 5443 8164 363 544 
Second 18143 27214 5443 8164 363 544 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 439 - 
 
  3. Payments for maintenance of protection documents  
Third 18143 27214 5443 8164 363 544 
Fourth 26920 40379 8076 12114 538 808 
Fifth 26920 40379 8076 12114 538 808 
Sixth 35071 52607 10521 15782 701 1052 
Seventh 35071 52607 10521 15782 701 1052 
Eighth 53835 80752 16150 24226 1077 1615 
Ninth 53835 80752 16150 24226 1077 1615 
Tenth 53835 80752 16150 24226 1077 1615 
Eleventh 71384 107076 21415 32123 1428 2142 
Twelfth 71384 107076 21415 32123 1428 2142 
Thirteenth 107656 161484 32297 48445 2153 3230 
Fourteenth 107656 161484 32297 48445 2153 3230 
Fifteenth 107656 161484 32297 48445 2153 3230 
Sixteenth 125205 187808 37562 56342 2504 3756 
Seventeenth 125205 187808 37562 56342 2504 3756 
Eighteenth 125205 187808 37562 56342 2504 3756 
Nineteenth 142746 214118 42824 64235 2855 4282 
Twentieth 142746 214118 42824 64235 2855 4282 
Twenty-first 142746 214118 42824 64235 2855 4282 
Twenty-second 142746 214118 42824 64235 2855 4282 
Twenty-third 142746 214118 42824 64235 2855 4282 
Twenty-fourth 142746 214118 42824 64235 2855 4282 
Twenty-fifth 142746 214118 42824 64235 2855 4282 
2) Patent for utility model  
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
First 14688 22031 4406 6609 294 441 
Second 14688 22031 4406 6609 294 441 
Third 14688 22031 4406 6609 294 441 
Fourth 42728 64092 12818 19227 855 1282 
Fifth 42728 64092 12818 19227 855 1282 
Sixth 42728 64092 12818 19227 855 1282 
Seventh 42728 64092 12818 19227 855 1282 
Eighth 42728 64092 12818 19227 855 1282 
3) Protection document for industrial design  
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
First 16107 24161 4832 7248 322 483 
Second 16107 24161 4832 7248 322 483 
Third 16107 24161 4832 7248 322 483 
Fourth 23429 35143 7029 10543 469 703 
Fifth 23429 35143 7029 10543 469 703 
Sixth 27821 41732 8346 12520 556 835 
Seventh 27821 41732 8346 12520 556 835 
Eighth 29254 43882 8776 13165 585 878 
Ninth 29254 43882 8776 13165 585 878 
Tenth 33679 50518 10104 15155 674 1010 
Eleventh 49786 74679 14936 22404 996 1494 
Twelfth 49786 74679 14936 22404 996 1494 
Thirteenth 49786 74679 14936 22404 996 1494 
Fourteenth 49786 74679 14936 22404 996 1494 
Fifteenth 49786 74679 14936 22404 996 1494 
Sixteenth 73594 110391 22078 33117 1472 2208 
Seventeenth 73594 110391 22078 33117 1472 2208 
Eighteenth 73594 110391 22078 33117 1472 2208 
Nineteenth 73594 110391 22078 33117 1472 2208 
Twentieth 73594 110391 22078 33117 1472 2208 
4) Patent for selection achievement  
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
First 10036 15054 3011 4516 201 301 
Second 10036 15054 3011 4516 201 301 
Third 10036 15054 3011 4516 201 301 
Fourth 14911 22366 4473 6710 298 447 
Fifth 14911 22366 4473 6710 298 447 
Sixth 19420 29129 5826 8739 388 583 
Seventh 19420 29129 5826 8739 388 583 
Eighth 29786 44679 8936 13404 596 894 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 440 - 
 
  3. Payments for maintenance of protection documents  
Ninth 29786 44679 8936 13404 596 894 
Tenth 29786 44679 8936 13404 596 894 
Eleventh 39509 59263 11853 17779 790 1185 
Twentieth 39509 59263 11853 17779 790 1185 
Thirteenth 59554 89330 17866 26799 1191 1787 
Fourteenth 59554 89330 17866 26799 1191 1787 
Fifteenth 59554 89330 17866 26799 1191 1787 
Sixteenth 69286 103929 20786 31179 1386 2079 
Seventeenth 69286 103929 20786 31179 1386 2079 
Eighteenth 69286 103929 20786 31179 1386 2079 
Nineteenth 79018 118527 23705 35558 1580 2371 
Twentieth 79018 118527 23705 35558 1580 2371 
Twenty-first 79018 118527 23705 35558 1580 2371 
Twenty-second 79018 118527 23705 35558 1580 2371 
Twenty-third 79018 118527 23705 35558 1580 2371 
Twenty-fourth 79018 118527 23705 35558 1580 2371 
Twenty-fifth 79018 118527 23705 35558 1580 2371 
Twenty-sixth - thirtieth 88393 132589 26518 39777 1768 2652 
Thirty-first-thirty-fifth 98214 147321 29464 44196 1964 2946 
Thirty-sixth -Fortieth 108036 162054 32411 48616 2161 3241 
Forty-first- forty fifth 117857 176786 35357 53036 2357 3536 
 
Approved by Order of the Minister of Justic e of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 368 of 
18 December 2014.   
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 441 - 
 
  ANNEX 24 
Preferential Trade Agreements 
I. CIS Free Trade Area  Basic Agreements 
- Agreement on the Creation of Free Trade Area of 15 April 1994; 
- Protocol on Amending the Agreements on th e Creation of Free Trade Area of 15 April 1994 
(2 April 1999); 
- Protocol on the Rules for Conducting of Consultations on Phasing-Out of Exemptions from 
Free Trade Regime of the Parties to the Agr eement on the Creation of Free Trade Area 
of 24 December 1999;  
- Agreement on Free Trade Area of 18 October 2011, signed by the following CIS countries:  
Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, the Russian Federation, 
Tajikistan and Ukraine; and, 
- Protocol on Application of the Agreement on Free Trade Area of 18 October 2011 between 
Parties to the Agreement and the Repu blic of Uzbekistan of 31 May 2013. 
 Bilateral Free Trade Agreements Concluded under the CIS 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of Republic of Azerba ijan 10 June 1997 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  
Azerbaijan 10 June 1997 - not effective, new Protocol signed; 
- Protocol on Amending the Free Trade Agreem ent between the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Government of th e Republic of Azerbaijan 10 June 1997 
(24 May 2005) - effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Government of the Republic of Armenia of 20 September 1999 – effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G ove rnme nt of the  R e p ubl ic  of Kaza kh s tan and the Government of Republic of Armenia 
of 20 September 1999 - not effective, terms ended; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Belarus (23 September 1997) – effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Kyrgyz Republic  of 22 June 1997 – effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic 
of 22 June 1997 – effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Moldova of 26 May 1995 – effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan an d the Government of the Republic of Moldova 
of 26 May 1995 – effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Russian Federation of 22 October 1992 – not effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the Russian Federation of 22 October 1992 - not effective; 
- Protocol on Establishment of Free Trade Regime without Exemptions and Restrictions - 
not effective; 
- Amendment of 23 December 1998 to the Protoc ol on Establishment of Free Trade Regime 
without Exemptions and Restrictions between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Russian Federation of 20 January 1995 – not effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Tajikistan of 22 November 1995 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  Tajikistan of 22 November 1995 – effective; WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 442 - 
 
  - Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Uzbe kistan of 2 June 1997 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  
Uzbekistan of 2 June 1997 - effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of Ukraine of 17 September 1994 – effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  U k r a i n e  of 17 September 1994 – effective;  
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Government of Georgia of 11 November 1997 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of Georgia 
of 11 November 1997 – not effective, new Protocol signed; and, 
- Protocol on Amending the Free Trade Agreem ent between the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Government of Geor gia of 11 November 1997 (11 November 2004) 
- effective. 
Most Important Agreements Adopted within the CIS FTA: 
- Decision of the Council of the Heads of the Governments of the Commonwealth of 
Independent States on Rules of Origin of 30 November 2000 - not effective; 
- Agreement on Rules of Origin in th e Commonwealth of Independent States 
of 20 November 2009 - effective; 
- Agreement on Re-export of Goods and the Procedure of Licensing of Re-export 
of 15 April 1994;  
- Agreement on Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic Activity 
of 3 November 1995; 
- Protocol on Amendments into Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic 
Activity of 4 June 1999; 
- Protocol on Amendments into Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic 
Activity of 8 October 1999; 
- Protocol to the Agreement on Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic 
Activity of 20 June 2000; and, 
- Agreement on Measures for Prevention and Restraint of Fictitious Trade Marks and 
Geographical Indications of 4 June 1999. 
II. The Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Russian Federation within the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) 
EurAsEC Agreements that Form Legal Basis for the Customs Union: 
- Agreement on the Customs Union between the Republic of Belarus and the Russian 
Federation of 6 January 1995; and, 
- Agreement on the Customs Union between th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 20 January 1995; 
Customs Union Agreements that Finalized the Creation of the CU: 
- Agreement on Export Customs Duties with regard to the Third Countries 
of 25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on Common Rules for Determining the Country of Origin of 25 January 2008; - Agreement on Determination of Customs Valuation of Goods Transferred Across the 
Customs Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008;  
- Protocol on Common System of Tariff Preferences of the Customs Union 
of 12 December 2008; 
- Agreement on Rules of Origin of Goods Originating from Developing and Least-developed 
Countries of 12 December 2008; and, 
- Treaty on the Customs Code of th e Customs Union of 27 November 2009; WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 443 - 
 
  Agreement establishing the Legal Basis for the Si ngle Economic Space between the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation: 
- Agreement on Coordinated Principles on Co unteraction to Illegal Labor Migration from 
Third Countries of 19 November 2010. 
III. Other Bilateral FTAs 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  S e r b i a  o f  7  O c t o b e r  2 0 1 0  ( e n t e r e d  i n t o  f o r c e  
on 10 January 2012). 
   WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 444 - 
 
    
APPENDIX 
 
DRAFT DECISION 
 
ACCESSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
 
Decision of [X Month 2015] 
 
 The General Council, 
 
 Having regard to  paragraph 2 of Article XII and pa ragraph 1 of Article IX of the 
Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (the "WTO Agreement"), and the 
Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed by the 
General Council (WT/L/93),  
 Conducting  the functions of the Ministerial Confer ence in the interval between meetings 
pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article IV of the WTO Agreement,  
 Taking note  of the application of the Republic of Kazakhstan for accession to the 
WTO Agreement dated 29 January 1996,  
 Noting  the results of the negotiations directed toward the establishment of the terms of 
accession of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the WTO Agreement and having prepared a Protocol on the Accession of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
 
 Decides  as follows: 
1. The Republic of Kazakhstan may accede to the WTO Agreement on the terms and conditions 
set out in the Protocol annexed to this Decision. 
 
 
_______________ 
 
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 445 - 
 
  DRAFT PROTOCOL  
ON THE ACCESSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
Preamble 
 
 The World Trade Organization (hereinafter referred to as the "WTO"), pursuant to the 
approval of the General Council of the WTO accorded under Article XII of the Marrakesh Agreement 
Establishing the World Trade Organization (hereinafter referred to as the "WTO Agreement"), and the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinaft er referred to as "Kazakhstan"),  
 
 Taking note of  the Report of the Working Party on the Accession of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO Agreement reproduced in document WT/ACC/KAZ/93, dated 23 June 2015 
(hereinafter referred  to as the "Working Party Report"), 
 
 Having regard to  the results of the negotiations on the accession of Kazakhstan to the 
WTO Agreement,  
 
 Agree  as follows: 
PART I - GENERAL 
 
1. Upon entry into force of this Protocol pursuant to paragraph 8, Kazakhstan accedes to the 
WTO Agreement pursuant to Article XII of that Agreement and thereby becomes a Member of the WTO.  
 
2. The WTO Agreement to which Kazakhstan accedes shall be the WTO Agreement, including 
the Explanatory Notes to that Agreement, as rectified, amended or otherwise modified by such legal 
instruments as may have entered into force before the date of entry into force of this Protocol.  This 
Protocol, which shall include the commitments referred to in paragraph 1175 of the Working Party Report, shall be an integral part of the WTO Agreement. 
3. Except as otherwise provided for in para graph 1175 of the Working Party Report, those 
obligations in the Multilateral Trade Agreements annexed to the WTO Agreement that are to be implemented over a period of time starting with the entry into force of that Agreement shall be implemented by Kazakhstan as if it had accepted that Agreement on the date of its entry into force. 
 
4. Kazakhstan may maintain a measure inconsistent with paragraph 1 of Article II of the 
General Agreement on Trade in Services (hereinafter referred to as "GATS") provided that such a 
measure was recorded in the list of Article II Exemptions annexed to this Protocol and meets the 
conditions of the Annex to the GATS on Article II Exemptions. 
 
PART II - SCHEDULES 
 
5. The Schedules reproduced in the Annex to this Protocol shall become the Schedule of 
Concessions and Commitments an nexed to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 
(hereinafter referred to as the "GATT 1994") and the Schedule of Specific Commitments annexed to 
the GATS relating to Kazakhstan.  The staging of the concessions and commitments listed in the 
Schedules shall be implemented as specified in the relevant parts of the respective Schedules.  
6. For the purpose of the reference in paragraph 6(a) of Article II of the GATT 1994 to the date 
of that Agreement, the applicable date in respec t of the Schedules of Concessions and Commitments 
annexed to this Protocol shall be the date of entry into force of this Protocol. 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 446 - 
 
  PART III - FINAL PROVISIONS 
 7. This Protocol shall be open for acceptance, by signature or otherwise, by Kazakhstan until 
31 October 2015 or such later date as may be decided by the General Council. 
 
8. This Protocol shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the day upon which it shall 
have been accepted by Kazakhstan.  
 
9. This Protocol shall be deposited with the Director-General of the WTO.  The Director-General 
of the WTO shall promptly furnish a certified copy of this Protocol and a notification of acceptance by 
Kazakhstan thereto pursuant to paragraph 7 to each Member of the WTO and to Kazakhstan.    
10. This Protocol shall be registered in accordance with the provisions of Article 102 of the 
Charter of the United Nations.    
 Done at […] this […] day of […] in a single copy in the English, French and Spanish 
languages, each text being authentic, except that a Schedule annexed hereto may specify that it is authentic in only one of these languages, and the Working Party Report is authentic in English only. 
 
 
_______________ 
 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/93 
 
- 447 - 
 
  ANNEX 
SCHEDULE CLXXII – THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
Authentic only in the English language. 
(Circulated in document WT/ACC/KAZ/93/Add.1) 
_______________ 
SCHEDULE OF SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS ON SERVICES 
LIST OF ARTICLE II EXEMPTIONS 
Authentic only in the English language. 
(Circulated in document WT/ACC/KAZ/93/Add.2) 
__________