JOB/GC/124  
 
26 April 2017 
(17-2294) Page: 1/3 
General Council  Original: English  
 
POSSIBLE ELEMENTS OF  A WTO INSTRUMENT ON INVESTMENT FACILITATION  
COMMUNICAT ION FROM ARGENTINA AND BRAZIL  
The following communication, dated 24 April 2017, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegations of Argentina and Brazil . 
 
_______________  
 
 
1  INTRODUCTION  
1.1.  Investment facilitation (IF) has been receiving increasing attention by Members as a 
meaningful means to promote cross -border investment flows and , therefore , strengthen the global 
economy. India' s initiative on services facilitation – as express ed in documents "Concept Note for 
an Initiative on Trade Facilitation in Services " (S/WPDR/W/55), " Possible Elements of a Trade 
Facilitation In Services Agreement " (S/WPDR/W/57) and " Trade Facilitation Agreement for 
Services " (S/C/W/372) - further added mo mentum to current informal discussions on investment 
facilitation, as such initiative encompasses the supply of services through commercial presence 
(mode 3 ). The workshop organized by Mexico, Indonesia, Korea, Turkey and Australia (MIKTA)  on 
the issue of Investment Facilitation, the conclusions of which were circulated in JOB/GC/121 , and 
the document tabled by the Russian Federation ( JOB/GC/120 ) also contributed to a more in -depth 
discussion of the issue of investment facilitation.  
1.2.  From a public policy per spective, there seems to be no reason for Members to adopt or adjust 
institutional and regulatory measures to facilitate investment in services only and not investment s 
in general. Therefore, serious consideration should be given to the establish ment of a common 
framework encompassing investment facilitation in general, that is, in both services and goods.  
1.3.  There seems to be a very solid majority of Members, including the co -sponsors , that firmly 
believe that any WTO discussion or negotiation on investment w ill only succeed if it avoids well 
known contentious issues, such as protection rules (market access, compensation for 
expropriation, etc .) and dispute settlement clauses , in particular In vestor -State Dispute 
Settlement  (ISDS). In other words, if any multi lateral effort in this area is to succeed, it must be 
strictly circumscribed to facilitation.  
1.4.  Absolute clarity is also needed with regard to what is underst ood as facilitation. Based upon 
UNCTAD's conceptual framework, the co -sponsors  understand that inve stment facilitation 
encompasses the set of policy measures and activities aimed at making it easier for investors to 
establish, maintain and expand their investments in host countries, as well as to conduct their 
day-to-day business. It can also include is sues related to corporate social responsibility. 
Facilitation can also be defined by exclusion: it does not include any substantive investment 
protection rule s or dispute settlement provision s.  
1.5.  It is also clear that, despite not involving investment prote ction rules or dispute settlement, 
WTO provisions on investment facilitation, to be effective in reducing transaction costs and making 
it simpler for investors to invest, may require national legislative and institutional arrangements 
that, in a few cases,  could prove challenging, in particular for developing countries and LDCs. 
Therefore, like the Trade Facilitation Agreement, investment facilitation measures could be 
implemented in an incremental manner, and mean ingful special and differential  treatment 
provided for.  JOB/GC/124  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.6.  In light of the foregoing, the co -sponsors herein submit possible elements of a WTO 
instrument (an agreement or a ministerial decision) on investment facilitation .  
1.7.   The co -sponsors  are ready to further elaborate on the ideas herein presented,  including by 
means of actual text drafting.  
2  POSSIBLE ELEMENTS OF  A WTO INSTRUMENT ON INVESTMENT FACILITAT ION 
2.1.  SCOPE: a WTO instrument on investment facilitation would apply to measures taken by 
Members to facilitate investment  whether for production of goo ds or for the supply of services . It 
would cover FDI and , as indicated above,  would not include investment protection rules and 
dispute settlement disciplines. Government procurement and public concessions would not be 
covered by the instrument.  
2.2.  TRANSPAREN CY: Members shall notify to the WTO all laws relating to investment policy 
issues of general application and regulatory issues of a cross -cutting nature. Members could also 
be called to provide, whenever possible, opportunities for investors  and stakeholde rs to comment 
on existing or proposed investment -related measures . 
2.3.  FORMALITIES AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS: Members would periodically review 
formalities and documentation requirements applicable to foreign investors and their investments 
and ensure, as  appropriate, that such formalities and documentation requirements are, for 
example: (i) not an impediment to admission and establishment; (ii) adopted or applied so as to 
minimize  as much as possible  the time and cost of establishing an investment; and (i ii) not 
maintained if no longer required.  
2.4.  ACCEPTANCE OF COPIES: Members would commit to make their best efforts to facilitate 
documentation requirements, such as accepting paper or electronic copies of supporting 
documentation required for the expansion, management, conduct, operation, and sale or other 
disposition of investments in their respective territories.  
2.5.  PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS: Establishing a common set of principles regarding  the 
processing of applications for investment screening and licensi ng would significantly contribute to 
creating a stable , predictable and efficient framework for investors.  
2.6.  SINGLE ELECTRONIC WINDOW: The re would be a single electronic entry point to competent 
authorities. The single window would uni fy electronic procedure s for the admission of investments, 
establishment of an enterprise, licensing and qualification procedures for an investment. 
Documents submitted to the single window would be accepted by all national agencies or 
regulatory bodies.  
2.7.  NATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS: In order to improve  the investment -related 
institutional governance , including through better communication betw een governments and 
investors, a National Focal Point or Ombudsperson would be established and given practical 
responsibilities su ch as: providing information/clarifying doubts on investment policies and other 
regulatory issues of a cross -cutting nature; seeking to address possible complaints of investors; 
and to the extent possible and without prejudice to specific competencies of p ertinent national 
agencies, assisting investors in resolving specific government -related difficulties. By performing 
such activities, among others, the Focal Point/Ombudsperson would help prevent disputes between 
Members. Each Member would be free to decid e whether a new office or agency would be 
established or whether these functions would be assigned to existing bodies. Members would 
decide on the nomenclature of any new agency/office.  
2.8.  COOPERATION AMONG NATIONAL FOCAL POINTS/OMBUDSPERSONS: Cooperation amo ng 
competent authorities of Members is quite important in facilitating investment. The areas for 
cooperation under this provision could include exchange of information on procedural requirements 
and associated formalities and documentation. Other areas of cooperation could address the 
sharing of experiences regarding implementation, best practices for collection and compilation of 
data relating to investment, exchange of statistics as well as technical guidance or assistance and 
support for capacity buildin g for small and medium enterprises.  JOB/GC/124  
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.9.  MULTILATERAL INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS: a Committee for Investment Facilitation 
would be set up to: a. follow the implementation of a WTO instrument on investment 
facilitation ; b. discuss issues related to investment fa cilitation of general interest; c. propose new 
cooperation and facilitation agendas; d. exchange experiences in investment facilitation; and e. 
compile and disseminate international best practices. Following the example of the Trade 
Facilitation Committee,  this proposed Committee could decide to reach out to the private sector to 
seek its views on issues related to investment facilitation.  
2.10.   CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: Members could be called to advocate for the 
voluntary adoption by investors of princi ples and standards for responsible business conduct.  
2.11.   IMPLEMENTATION: Following the example of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, obligations 
under a WTO instrument on investment facilitation could be divided into three categories, one for 
immediate implemen tation (Category A) and two others (B and C Categories) with different 
schedules of implementation.  
2.12.   SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT: the WTO instrument would contain special 
provisions for developing countries and LDCs pertaining to the entry into forc e of this Agreement 
due to their special economic and developmental situation as well as trade and financial needs. 
While LDCs would not be required to implement any obligations, they would be encouraged to do 
so.  
2.13.   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: Technical assistanc e would be provided to developing countries 
and LDCs in order to advance and strengthen their institutional and regulatory capacities in 
investment facilitation. The provision would entail obligations that help build the supply capacity of 
developing count ries and LDCs.  
__________