RESTRICTED  
  
S/WPDR/M/67  
 
28 June 2016  
(16-3476)  Page: 1/17  
Working Party on Domestic Regulation    
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 16 JUNE 2016 
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
 
The Working Party on Domestic Regulation (WPDR) held a meeting on 16 June 2016, first chaired 
by Mr Eog-Weon LEE of the Republic of Korea, and then by Ms Katarzyna STECZ from Poland. The 
agenda for the meeting was contained in document WTO/AIR/WPDR/5 dated 6 June 2016. An 
annotated agenda for the meeting was circulated in JOB/SERV/233 dated 9 June 2016.  
1  ITEM A – APPOINTMENT OF THE CHAIRPERSON FOR THE WORKING PARTY 1.1.  The Chairman informed the Working Party that the Chairman of the Council for Trade in 
Services had recently concluded his consultations on the slate of names for the Chairpersons of the 
subsidiary bodies, and that Ms Katarzyna Stecz from Poland was proposed for the Working Party 
on Domestic Regulation. He suggested that the Working Party elect her as its new Chairperson by acclamation. 
1.2.  It was so agreed. 
2  ITEM B – DEVELOPMENT OF REGULATORY DISCIPLINES UNDER GATS ARTICLE VI:4 
2.1.  The Chairperson recalled that many dele gations had indicated their preference for a 
comprehensive consideration of all of the elements  under the mandate of the Working Party at the 
last meeting in March 2016. In light of the time that had passed since the last substantive discussion, it was suggested by several delegations to start work with an exchange of views on 
objectives, priorities, and interests in the negotiations. She noted that in advance of the current 
meeting, a group of fourteen delegations had submitted a Communication setting out a number of 
elements that these delegations considered useful to discuss. The Communication was contained in document JOB/SERV/231/Rev.1
2.  
2.2.  Introducing the aforementioned Communi cation, the representative of New Zealand 
explained that the intention of the group was to build on the positive momentum and interest in 
domestic regulation in the lead up to Nairobi, and subsequent discussions in both the WPDR and 
the Council for Trade in Services (CTS) Special Session. She hoped that Members would join in 
exchanging views on these items, and that a clear pathway could be set out for a return to active 
negotiations on this important topic. She hoped that delegations could move forward together and 
capitalise on the considerable good work that had been done in the past on domestic regulation, as 
well as acknowledging the room for new ideas and fresh approaches. She wished that, as a group, 
the membership could move to action on eventual  deliverables that satisfied both the desires of 
the membership and the fulfilment of the Article VI:4 mandate. 
2.3.  Presenting the New Zealand perspective on domestic regulatory barriers impacting Members' 
service suppliers or affecting their commercial interests, she noted that New Zealand businesses had a strong commercial interest in domestic regulation disciplines. This was a message heard 
                                               
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to thei r rights and obligations under the WTO. 
2 Communication from Australia; Chile; China; Colombia; Hong Kong, China; the Republic of Korea; 
Mexico; New Zealand; Norway; the Russian Federation ; Singapore; Switzerland; the Separate Customs 
Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen And Mats u; and Turkey - Elem ents for Discussion. S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 2 - 
 
  frequently during domestic consultations with stakeholders, and a reason why strong domestic 
regulation provisions could be found in New Zealand's FTAs. New Zealand prioritised domestic regulation because its enterprises had continuously expressed a need for strong domestic regulation disciplines that enabled them to meaningfully take up the negotiated market access 
opportunities. Despite the fact that domestic regulation barriers were often less visible than entry 
restrictions like equity caps, joint venture requirements or restrictions on cross-border delivery, which often had a more transparent legislative basis, her delegation heard regular complaints from 
exporters and investors about the administrative barriers to be navigated in order to be approved 
to do business in a range of international markets.  
2.4.  She mentioned several issues of concern.  Opaque unpublished rules or processes made it 
difficult to understand how to navigate authorization requirements, and for service suppliers to 
know what was expected in order to succeed in completing authorization processes. Another issue 
concerned substantive standards or requirements that departed from international practice or imposed excessive burdens and which had no strong public policy justifications. Procedures often 
took too long or seemed open-ended, without any clarity or certainty for business on how long 
they should reasonably expect to wait for approvals and approval processes were at times duplicative without clear reason or justification.  
2.5.  These types of issues cost time and money,  but the impact could be more severe than that. 
Ninety-seven per cent of enterprises in New Ze aland were small businesses with fewer than 20 
employees, and 86 per cent of enterprises had less than five employees. For these types of 
businesses, opaque, open-ended, expensive and burdensome processes simply meant that they 
did not have the time or resources to access those markets, regardless of how good that country's 
national treatment or market access commitments were. On the flip side, improvements to domestic regulation to be agreed under the existing GATS mandate could deliver tangible benefits 
for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). Put simply, licensing requirements and 
procedures, qualification requirements and procedures, and technical standards could make the difference between the ability to enter a market or  not. Robust domestic regulation disciplines 
could help level the playing field. 
2.6.  For this reason, New Zealand sought to negotiate, under the scope of the full Article VI:4 
mandate in GATS, multilateral disciplines that would apply to all Members, although she was open to discussion of appropriate development-related provisions. Disciplines should encompass 
qualification requirements and procedures, technica l standards and licensing requirements with the 
aim of ensuring that such requirements were based on objective and transparent criteria, not more burdensome than necessary to ensure the qual ity of the service, and not in themselves a 
restriction on the supply of a service. Given the la rge amount of work that had been done already, 
and the clear priority placed on this work by many delegations, New Zealand would like to see 
whether an outcome could be achieved in time fo r MC11. That, of course, would require work to 
start immediately. 
2.7.  In terms of the elements to be included in the disciplines, she stated that the scope of 
negotiations had to be kept broad and allow delegations to raise issues of interest to them that fell within the Article VI:4 mandate. There was no need to pre-emptively decide what should or should 
not be included in the final outcome, as the mandate in Article VI:4 had already been established 
and details of the disciplines could be decided during the negotiations. 
2.8.  New Zealand sought a general obligation to administer measures of general application in a 
reasonable, objective and impartial manner. This was an important principle, and a cornerstone of 
good regulatory practice. If that standard were not met, it would be very difficult for service suppliers to navigate local regulatory systems. Furthermore, New Zealand considered that the 
necessity test would be an important part of the domestic regulation discussions. She also 
highlighted New Zealand's support for the right to regulate to be specifically included in the 
disciplines. Doing so would make it very clear that  domestic regulation disciplines did not prevent 
Members from appropriately regulating services sectors to meet a range of domestic policy 
objectives.  
2.9.  New Zealand also placed importance on including enhanced disciplines targeted to licensing 
and qualification requirements and procedures, and technical standards. More specifically, for 
New Zealand, such disciplines should address fees , authentication of documents, and procedures 
for verifying competence, for example. Disciplines should further ensure that competent S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 3 - 
 
  authorities were required to meet certain basic procedural fundamentals during the application 
process including with regard to informing a pplicants of the status and outcome of their 
applications, dealing with incomplete applications, and providing general guidance on timeframes. The disciplines should also contain elements on pr ocedures after the application process, including 
providing reasons for rejection and the possibility of appeals or resubmission. New Zealand would 
like to see disciplines that ensured that technical standards were objective, transparent and made publicly available within reasonable timeframes, as well as disciplines that encouraged the 
transparency of standards developed by non-governmental bodies. Disciplines should also ensure 
enhanced transparency and publication. Finall y, New Zealand was open to discuss appropriate 
flexibilities for developing country and LDC Members. However, in order to have a meaningful discussion on this front, clarity on the substance of the disciplines was first required.  
2.10.  As for the way forward, New Zealand would like to see a return to text-based negotiations 
as soon as possible . In order to facilitate this , she suggested taking an element- or theme-based 
approach, e.g. to address, in turn, issues such  as development and administration of measures; 
procedures; development; transparency; legal and institutional provisions, as necessary (including 
introduction, definitions, potential establishmen t of a Committee, etc.). An element-by-element 
approach would at least initially simplify consultations with capitals and allow more delegations to 
participate meaningfully in the discussions. While the different elements would be d iscussed 
sequentially, the process would differ from that fo llowed last year in that Members would have 
reassurance that elements would be discussed in turn, rather than focusing on elements in 
isolation. Obviously, there would be a need to keep an overview and to periodically bring the 
various elements back together to ensure balance and consistency. Taking an elements-based 
approach might also help in generating textual proposals . Rather than requiring any single text to 
be used as a starting point for all aspects of the negotiation, it would be useful to consider 
Members' needs for each specific element or theme. This would not imply discarding the useful 
work contained in previous texts or taking a one-size-fits-all approach for every area of the negotiation, but rather building on that work and ensuring that it was fit for purpose . 
Acknowledging that many delegations were attached to the 2009 Chair's text, her delegation also 
saw value in some of the refinements that were made in many aspects of the 2011 text. For 
example, advantages in the 2011 text existed in  terms of a more workable structure through 
merging related provisions on licensing and qua lification procedures, and elements that showed 
convergence through ad referendum agreement (such as in relation to the right to regulate, scope, 
transparency, contact points and non-application to LDCs). There might also be useful contributions from other sources such as the Accountancy Disciplines already agreed by the CTS, 
or in Members' FTA practice . In order to move to negotiations, New Zealand noted that additional 
meetings of the WPDR outside of the regular clusters might be requ ired, in both formal and 
informal configuration .  
2.11.  The representative of Turkey stated that he r delegation was in favor of strong disciplines in 
the area of domestic regulation and welcomed th at the membership would like to pursue further 
work under the full mandate of GATS Article VI:4. Developing disciplines on domestic regulation was particularly important because regulatory measures might turn into indirect restrictions on trade in services in an illegitimate way. Although her delegation recognized that governments 
needed to be able to regulate their domestic markets, regulations should not impair the 
commitments Members had made under the GATS. Turkey believed that domestic regulation 
disciplines should accomplish that measures were predictable, transparent, and objective. Service 
suppliers should be able to navigate easily through regulations, get timely responses and not  
endure undue burden. In sum, her delegation want ed to ensure that domestic regulations did not 
constitute barriers to trade in services. 
2.12.  The representative of the Republic of Kore a compared the relation between trade in services 
and poor domestic regulations with the relation  between trade in goods and customs not working 
properly. Even if a service sector was formally opened, it was not truly open if a service supplier had to submit one hundred different papers to five different authorities and wait for two years to obtain a license. Good disciplines on domestic regulation would actually benefit developing 
countries, and especially SMEs which often had in sufficient resources to go through complicated 
licensing or qualification procedures. 
2.13.  With regard to specific elements to be included in the disciplines, she stated that the scope 
should be the same as set out in GATS Article VI:4, so that licensing requirements and procedures, S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 4 - 
 
  qualification requirements and procedures and technical standards were addressed. However, 
Korea's main interest was in establishing disciplines related to authorization. Here, Korea was flexible on whether to establish separate obligations for each element or to combine obligations for authorization for all procedures. Korea also wanted to see the following elements to be included in 
the disciplines: guaranteeing the objective and transparent nature of domestic regulation 
measures; adequate and simple procedures, such as reasonable timeframes for processing applications and providing more predictability in the process in case of rejection or approval of an 
application; fees that did not restrict the su pply of the service; and other element-specific 
provisions. As for transparency, Members should, at a minimum publish information on the requirements and procedures for authorization, contact information of relevant authorities, procedures for appeal or review, opportunities for public involvement, and timeframes for 
processing of applications. Korea was fully aware of the importance of the development aspect and 
was ready to listen to the views of developing count ries with regard to the necessary flexibility.  
2.14.  As to how to move forward to negotiations on these elements, she felt that the two Chair 
texts could provide the Working Party with a solid basis to work on. However, if some Members 
were not comfortable with the existing Chair te xts, other approaches could be envisaged. For 
example, Members could first have a substantial discussion on objectives and priorities, and identify any necessary elements. Thereafter, prop onents of each specific element could provide 
more specific text proposals. These proposals could then be organized into a consolidated text. The 
advantage of such an approach might be that it  could reflect new and diverse views of various 
Members before the text-based negotiation commenc es. In any case, Korea was flexible and open 
to any method, as long as it was a step toward  text-based negotiations. She called for similar 
flexibility on the approach also from other Members, as what mattered most was the final result, 
and not the precise pathway chosen to get there. 
2.15.  The representative of the Russian Federation  noted that service suppliers of WTO Members 
currently faced a significant number of barriers including administrative hurdles. Development of 
advanced disciplines on domestic regulation would significantly contribute to openness of markets. 
It was the membership's responsibility to intensify discussions and to deliver practicable valuable results on this track. Substantial discussion had already started before the Nairobi Ministerial 
Conference and had resulted in the draft do cument "Services Transparency in Domestic 
Regulation". In her delegation's opinion, the su bject of transparency was well developed and was 
of interest to economic operators as it contributed to the predictability and openness of the market. Therefore, she suggested starting negotiat ions on the text of transparency in domestic 
regulation. Besides transparency, her delegation proposed that domestic regulation negotiations 
should aim at the following: licensing procedures shall not be in themselves a restriction; fees for a licence shall not be in themselves a restriction; decisions on granting/denial of a licence shall be 
made without undue delay; transparent procedures should exist in respect of information on the 
status of an application for a licence; applicants should have the possibility to reapply for a licence. Development of these matters would contribute to facilitation of trade in service between WTO 
Members, attract investment in services sectors,  and increase predictability of WTO Members' 
markets.  
2.16.  The representative of Hong Kong, China recalled that his delegation had always been a 
strong proponent of concrete domestic regulation disciplines, following the full mandate of 
Article VI:4 of the GATS. As one of the co-s ponsors of the Communication introduced by 
New Zealand earlier, he had high hopes for a breakthrough in the domestic regulation work. There 
was no question about the benefits of strong domestic regulation disciplines, and Hong Kong, China was a beneficiary of its own objective, transparent, efficient and simple 
regulations. While he was not advocating exportin g this regulatory regime to other Members, he 
firmly believed strong and reasonable domestic regulation regimes could promote businesses anywhere and everywhere. It certainly benefited services exporters, and especially the SMEs among them. He was, therefore, very pleased to see th e growing momentum and broadened 
interest in the work of the Working Party, as indicated at the last WPDR meeting, in the informal 
meeting of the Special Session of CTS in May and at the last General Council meeting. There was 
now an opportunity to turn interests into results. From his delegation's perspective, paragraphs (a) 
to (c) of GATS Article VI:4 were the bread and butter of any deliverables in domestic regulation. 
After all, this was the mandate given by GATS. On  the other hand, the world had certainly changed 
since the GATS had been formulated two decades ago. One needed to catch up with the reality, 
even in the case of domestic regulation. Hong  Kong, China was therefore open to considering S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 5 - 
 
  additional elements, other than those mentioned by Article VI:4, provided that such new elements 
were drawn up and applied in a non-discriminatory manner and were trade facilitating.  
2.17.  Hong Kong, China considered the following components of the domestic regulation 
disciplines to be essential. First, the disciplines should at least apply to measures relating to licensing requirements and procedures, qualificat ion requirements and procedures, and technical 
standards in sectors where a Member had undertaken specific commitments. It could be discussed 
whether certain provisions could be expanded to cover measures of general application in all sectors. Second, and equally important, were certain principles involved in the formulation and 
application of these measures. Examples included: (a) measures should be based on objective and 
transparent criteria, and be related to the services being regulated and the policy objectives which the regulatory measures seek to achieve; (b) procedures used by the competent authorities should 
be impartial with respect to all applicants, and should not in themselves unduly impede fulfilment 
of requirements; and (c) measures should be im plemented in a transparent manner. Examples of 
this included engagement of the affected partie s in the development of measures, and the prompt 
publication of relevant information on any required fees, the contact information of the competent 
authorities, and the procedures for monitoring compliance with the terms and conditions of the 
licenses; (d) a necessity test to determine whether measures were implemented and enforced for legitimate regulatory purposes; and (e) a one-stop shop for applications, as far as possible. In 
other words, Members should try to avoid requiring applicants seeking authorization for the supply 
of a service to approach more than one competent authority for each application.  
2.18.  Specifically, in terms of the administration of authorizations, he suggested to discuss: 
(a) the timing related to the submission of applications; (b) the scheduling of examinations with reasonable frequency, if examinations were required; (c) the acceptability of electronic 
applications and authenticated copies of documents; (d) the setting of fees related to 
authorization; (e) the normal timeframe for processing an application; (f) the communication with the applicant with regard to the status of the application; (g) the provision of reasons for rejection 
of an application, where applicable; and (h) the entry into effect of a license or authorization to the 
extent practicable. 
2.19.  His delegation also saw great value in including development-related provisions in the 
disciplines. Such provisions were important to cater for Members at different stages of development, and to tie in with the development agenda of the Doha Round. He emphasized the 
importance of formulating pathways on developing  these domestic regulation disciplines and urged 
all participants to consider setting milestones in the discussion. The priority of Hong Kong, China was to start text-based discussion as soon as possible, but he remained flexible and open to other 
ideas on the timeframe. Instead of reflecting on  post-Nairobi work, he urged the membership to 
set its vision as pre-MC11.  
2.20.  The representative of Norway considered that the starting point for elaborated rules and 
criteria for domestic regulation was the respect and recognition of Members’ right to regulate to 
meet national policy objectives. However, the right to regulate should be based on criteria for good 
governance. Such criteria included openness and transparency, as well as objective and impartial 
requirements and procedures. This was good for business, for consumers, for government, for the economy, and for development. Of course, Member s could not make rules on what qualifications 
were needed for the individual services, as the WTO was not a standard setting organization. 
However, Members could develop general criteria fo r how qualifications were to be assessed and 
verified. Members could maintain that procedures had to be reasonable, that they were not unduly 
burdensome, that they were as simple as possi ble, and that the procedures for assessment and 
verification did not take more time than necessary.  
2.21.  Many Members had national legislation and practice in this regard, and those who might 
only have them for certain cases, or not at all, would benefit from domestic regulation disciplines. 
She expressed the view that disciplines should be  applied by all Members, but recognized that 
there could be a need for transition periods, as well as capacity building for developing country 
Members so that these attain the necessary capacity  to craft and enforce disciplines, similar to the 
approach followed by the Trade Facilitation Agr eement (TFA). That said, she also recognized the 
need for some developing country Members, and especially LDCs, to attain capacity to be able to 
export services, which in turn pointed to some of the issues in discussions regarding the effectiveness of the services waiver. It was subject to discussion whether this could be covered S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 6 - 
 
  meaningfully by domestic regulation rules themselves. She considered that a lot of the work done 
in the WPDR in previous years was relevant and sound. There was no need to start anew, but it was important to update the discussions to reflec t any new examples or experiences, which might 
have a bearing on what was already on the table in the form of texts from 2009 and 2011. One 
approach could be to look at the questions th at were suggested for discussion at the current 
meeting and compare the answers to those questions with these texts.  
2.22.  The representative of Japan reiterated that domestic regulation was one priority area for his 
delegation. He shared recent experiences of do mestic regulatory barriers faced by Japanese 
service providers. Cases included situations without prior notification or with a delay in publication 
of rules or guidelines implementing laws pertaining to certain regulations. Some service providers reported of cases where the processing of an appl ication took such a long time that the system 
virtually failed to function. Other suppliers report ed that even after authorization had been granted 
to them, the particular authorization was nullified because of other different regulations. Japan 
suggested a number of non-exclusive elements to be included in the disciplines. Disciplines on 
transparency should include obligations on the publication of measures in advance and the 
provision of opportunity to comment; simplification of license/qualification procedures; 
establishment of a normal time-frame for processing  of applications; initiation of processing of 
applications without undue delay; and entry into effect of licenses without undue delay. As for the 
way forward, Japan was of the view that it was usef ul to clarify first those objectives and elements 
of domestic regulation disciplines on which there was convergence among Members before embarking on text based negotiations. He supported  exploring the idea raised by Korea in this 
regard.  
2.23.  The representative of China noted that her delegation had always attached great importance 
to the domestic regulation negotiations, and had participated in the negotiations constructively 
with a view to achieving positive results. Discussion on multilateral disciplines would help streamline Members' regulatory frameworks, better implement market access commitments, and 
enhance transparency. She recalled that in the past, Members had already shared experiences of 
domestic regulatory barriers in the Working Party. At that time, China had also played an active role and submitted relevant information. Based on Members’ concerted efforts and comprehensive 
discussions, elements of interest had been re flected in the 2009 and 2011 Chair texts. China 
believed that those texts contain hard-won progress made on certain elements and contributed significantly to the domestic regulation discussion s. She called for the spirit embodied in those 
texts to be respected. Discussions should continue in accordance with the full mandate of 
Article VI:4 and keep in mind the development dimension of the collective agenda, in order to 
achieve a balanced outcome as soon as possible.  
2.24.  The representative of Mexico supported the statement by New Zealand and other speakers. 
Mexico had co-sponsored the Communication of a group of Members with a view to restarting 
discussions regarding the negotiation of disciplines on domestic regulation. Resumption of work 
was very important to fulfill the mandate contained in GATS Article VI:4 of GATS and to obtain a 
possible deliverable for the next Ministerial meeting. Mexico had always had been interested in developing disciplines on domestic regulation to complement commitments on market access and 
national treatment. Her delegation had recently in cluded such disciplines in its FTAs, where they 
applied in some cases at a horizontal level. Disciplines were very important for certain services sectors such as professional services, or some modes of supply such as Mode 4. In relation to the 
objectives and priorities, Mexico was interested in disciplines on licensing and qualification 
requirements and procedures, technical standard s, and on transparency. Her delegation was 
flexible with regard to the starting point of the work, but suggested to commence with issues that 
appeared least controversial and had sufficient support. Numerous helpful inputs to these 
discussions already existed, such as previously developed draft texts and other proposals. Both 
negotiating texts of 2009 and 2011 contained relevant elements that could be included, some of them related to fees, transparency in licensing procedures, and calling for reasonable intervals for 
processing applications for licensing and verification of qualifications. With regard to the way 
forward, her delegation remained flexible and was open to any proposal.  
2.25.   The representative of Colombia  stated that his delegation was a co-sponsor of document 
JOB/SERV/231/Rev.1 which had been submitted to promote discussion about the interests and 
priorities of Members on domestic regulation. The main barriers that Colombian service exporters faced in domestic regulation related to: difficulties in getting information about licensing S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 7 - 
 
  requirements in countries with federal systems of government; requirements to carry out all 
procedures necessary to obtain a license in person; high costs of licenses; and general lack of clarity in licensing procedures. Colombia had high ambitions in the domestic regulation negotiations and would like to see resumption of negotiations based on a text that met the full 
mandate of GATS Article VI:4. That said, his delega tion was flexible on the way to reach that end 
result. It was necessary to advance the proces s focusing on discussing viable, realistic and 
achievable elements. His delegation was aware that  this view was shared by many Members, but 
that progress had not materialized because discussions had focused on reviewing the mandate as 
a whole, and sensitivities existed with regard to some texts. He suggested concentrating on a few 
aspects that addressed the priorities of the member ship in a balanced way, so that the internal 
consultation process would be facilitated and a clearer view would emerge of the challenges that 
would have to be discussed with regard to the various aspects of the negotiating mandate. In this 
regard, Colombia's initial priorities would be on provisions to increase transparency and provisions related to requirements and procedures for lice nsing. While these aspects alone would not fulfill 
the mandate of Article VI:4, his delegation believed  that initial work on these elements would build 
the foundations for progress in the discussions.  
2.26.  As for the elements to be included in future disciplines on domestic regulation, Colombia 
believed that Members should at least be able to agree on provisions related to requirements for 
the submission of applications, the setting of fees, the times for processing applications and the possibility to inform applicants about the status of their application, among others. As for the 
continuation of negotiating on these elements, Colombia considered the current exercise to be an 
excellent step forward. Discussions should continue  based on straightforward texts that capitals 
could provide input on. Such documents could be based on the common elements found in the experiences shared today, for example, on tran sparency of procedures which was a frequently 
mentioned element. He expressed his hope that individual or groups of Members would present 
written proposals to support discussion of the issues. His delegation remained willing to analyze, prepare, and support such proposals.  
2.27.  The representative of Singapore reiterated  his delegation's commitment to engage on work 
for a meaningful outcome in domestic regulation. Following the recent renewed interest in the 
subject, Singapore saw good prospects for resumi ng technical discussions. Singapore had joined 
the other co-sponsors in trying to encourage constructive engagement through a series of 
questions to guide the Working Party in its way forward. Broadly speaking, the whole mandate of 
GATS Article VI:4 should be pursued. His delegation was still reflecting on its priorities, but preliminarily would like to see progress on de velopment of disciplines on procedures and 
transparency. For example, licensing and qualificat ion procedures should be as simple as possible 
and should not in themselves constitute a restrict ion to the supply of services and licensing fees 
should be reasonable and should also not in themselves restrict the supply of services. Reaching 
an outcome on these issues would provide greater clarity and certainty to Singapore's service 
suppliers and especially to the smaller businesses among them. Given the importance of delivering on the development mandate, the issue of develo pment should be included in any discussions on 
domestic regulation. His delegation was interested to listen to the priorities of other developing 
country Members, and, particularly, how they would see the development element being 
represented in the discussion. With regard to next steps, the present exercise should be useful in 
identifying areas that were doable, elements of co nvergence and, particularly, areas that might be 
useful for interested Members to engage on early. Members might collaborate with each other and 
develop text on an element-by-element basis.  
2.28.  The representative of Chinese Taipei no ted that her delegation had co-sponsored the 
discussion paper JOB/SERV/231/Rev.1 with a view to stimulating discussions following the very 
encouraging show of Members at the last m eeting in March, where many delegations had 
expressed a willingness and commitment to develop domestic regulation disciplines on the basis of the full mandate of GATS Article VI:4. As her delegation's economy was highly dependent on 
exports, it was particularly important to ensure th at domestic regulation in other countries did not 
constitute any unnecessary barriers to trade. A friendly and transparent domestic regulatory environment made a significant contribution to the fostering of further international trade. E choing 
previous speakers on the question of scope and objectives, Chinese Taipei stated that Members 
had to ensure that their measures relating to licensing and qualification requirements and procedures, and technical standards, were developed and administered in line with paragraphs 
(a) to (c) of GATS Article VI:4. The greatest bene ficiaries of such transparency requirements and 
procedures were Members' own service suppliers, many of which were SMEs, through the savings S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 8 - 
 
  of time and money that would otherwise be spent on collecting new market information. In light of 
this, her delegation sought inclusion of elements in the domestic regulation disciplines such as application procedures, fees, timeframes, and othe r elements that had just been signalled by 
previous speakers. She was open to the idea of  considering the development element in future 
work. The participation of developing country Members, including LDCs, in trade in services was 
very important, and she was willing to listen to the special needs of other Members. Turning to 
next steps, her delegation would definitely like to return to text-based discussions as soon as 
possible. Following the current exchange of view s, she suggested a remapping of the objectives 
and to start transforming the proposed elements into text-based proposals. She believed that 
useful references could be found in earlier work.  
2.29.  The representative of Chile stated that his delegation was one of the long-time supporters of 
disciplines on domestic regulation and was a co-sponsor of the Communication which was intended 
to facilitate discussions to resume negotiations on domestic regulation. Although twenty years had passed, the mandate contained in Article VI:4 of the GATS was not in force. With each passing 
day, it became more important to develop robust horizontal disciplines on domestic regulation, 
which would directly benefit service providers, and in particular the small and medium sized 
among them. His delegation regretted that Members had, to date, been unable to reach consensus 
on this matter. However, earlier work had not been in vain, since it had identified elements of high 
benefit, as well as areas of sensitivity to Members. Members should engage in the negotiations with the aim of obtaining a substantive outcome. In resuming the negotiations, one had to learn from previous mistakes. He called on the flexib ility and pragmatism of Members. There was no 
doubt that the multilateral trading system required modernization. In this regard, looking at the 
GATS system of rules in light of results obtain ed under regional agreements might constitute a 
valuable alternative that could be explored. Specifically, despite different national regulatory 
approaches across countries, many differences had been bridged in the context of regional 
agreements, such as issues of procedural transparency, measures of general application, and economic needs tests. These advances put the WPDR in a better position to advance its unfinished 
agenda.  
2.30.  With regard to elements of interest, it was essential to move to a higher degree of 
transparency in terms of requirements, procedures, authorizations, and technical standards. It was important to develop disciplines of horizontal a pplication, without discarding the possibility of 
sector specific disciplines. Work on multilateral disciplines should start as soon as possible on the 
basis of text, as this was the only way to progress and resolve any outstanding issues. He recalled that the Director-General of the WTO had recently  called on Members to move from reflection to 
action. In this context, Chile supported the presentation of concrete proposals by Members and 
was willing to contribute to the work.  
2.31.  The representative of the European Unio n welcomed the communication of the co-sponsors 
as a helpful tool to facilitate discussions in the Working Party. As already expressed in the last 
WPDR meeting, the European Union stood ready to engage in more in-depth work on domestic regulation, which it considered to be an import ant element of the post-Nairobi agenda. Domestic 
regulation was one of the key areas of trade in  services where further convergence amongst the 
membership was needed. He was pleased to see that many Members were now interested to 
engage in the discussions. The European Union agreed with the co-sponsors of JOB/SERV/231/Rev.1 that robust domestic regulation disciplines were essential to ensure that 
existing market access was not undermined. Addre ssing the questions raised in the paper, he 
stated that it was in the EU’s interest to cover all aspects of the built-in mandate of Article VI:4. No elements should be a priori  excluded from the discussions. While discussions could certainly 
benefit from past work undertaken in the Working Party, Members should at the same time be 
open to new ideas and text proposals. Positions taken in past discussions should not act as a straightjacket in future discussions.  
2.32.  In terms of substance, the EU would like to see a detailed set of provisions on licencing and 
qualification requirements and procedures included in future disciplines on domestic regulation. 
Benefit would also be reaped from clear and balanced provisions on how licencing and qualification procedures were to be carried out in an efficient manner with the aim to reduce the administrative 
burden for service suppliers, while bearing in mind the limitations of the competent authorities. 
These disciplines could, for example: ensure th at procedures and requirements were based on 
objective and transparent criteria;  ensure that competent authorities reach and administer their 
decisions in an independent manner; ensure th at authorisation fees were reasonable and S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 9 - 
 
  transparent and not in themselves a restriction on the supply of a service; encourage the use of 
instruments that could facilitate authorization procedures like applications in electronic format or authenticated copies, permit an applicant to submit an application at any time; where examinations were required, schedule such examinations at reasonably frequent intervals; ensure 
that fees were reasonable and transparent; incl ude timeframe provisions that covered the entire 
authorization cycle from the moment of filing an application to the final decision; and include disciplines on how to treat incomplete applications and how to deal with the rejection of 
applications and the possibilities of recourse against such rejection decision. Transparency of 
measures relating to licencing and qualification requirements and procedures and technical standards was also a key element of future disciplines. Finally, the European Union was of the opinion that future domestic regulation disciplines should confirm Members’ right to regulate or to 
introduce new regulations on the supply of services. 
2.33.  In terms of the process ahead, he suggested a two-step approach.  First, a limited number 
of topics should be identified and targeted discu ssions on these topics should be held, for example 
in an open-ended format. Following the outcomes  of those targeted discussions, the membership 
could move to a more general negotiation context in a second phase.  
2.34.  The representative of Thailand expressed his delegation's preference for a balanced 
approach in the discussion that encompassed all elements as mandated under Article VI:4 of the 
GATS. In this connection, the best approach to follow would be to move to text-based negotiations. The 2009 Chair text could serve as a basis for the discussion. However, Thailand was also flexible and open to new ideas and stood ready to further engage with other Members in the 
discussion to identify common elements. 
2.35.  The representative of the Kingdom of Saud i Arabia welcomed the willingness of Members to 
move on with the work on domestic regulation and to engage actively. Thanking the co-sponsors 
of the document for the elements for discussion , and sharing preliminary comments, she stated 
that her delegation believe strongly that liberalization and sound regulation enhanced the twin objectives of services negotiations. The principles and objectives of the mandate contained in 
GATS Article VI were clear, and provided for the development of any necessary disciplines to 
prevent qualification requirements and procedures , technical standards and licensing requirements 
from constituting unnecessary barriers to trade, while allowing Members to ensure the integrity of their markets and the protection of consumers. For domestic regulation to be an important part of 
any services outcome at MC11, Members had to start moving towards technical and substantive 
work on the basis of the full mandate contained in GATS Article VI:4 as soon as possible. Implementing the mandate should take into acco unt the development dimension, as well as the 
extent of commitments of recently acceded Members. She considered text-based negotiations to 
be the best method to move ahead. 
2.36.  The representative of Canada reiterated that his delegation continued to see value in 
prospective services negotiations at the WTO, and considered clear and specific disciplines on 
domestic regulation to be important complements to market access. Addressing the four proposed points for discussion, he first turned to Canadian service suppliers' experiences with regulatory barriers. Canadian services providers had cited lack  of transparency as a major obstacle in many 
markets, and advised that they often had difficulty just to learn whether any authorization 
procedures and requirements existed in a given ma rket and whom they should approach to seek 
authorization to supply a service.  
2.37.  With regard to negotiating interests and elements that Canada would seek as part of a 
domestic regulation outcome at the WTO, he ment ioned that transparency would be a priority for 
Canada. To operate effectively, service suppliers needed to have access to, and to understand, the 
applicable regulatory regime. In this regard, Canada believed disciplines should provide clarity that 
the key items related to the authorization process ha d to be published, set out that this should be 
done in advance and allow for opportunities to co mment. With regard to licensing and qualification 
procedures and requirements, he emphasized that  authorities should follow good regulatory 
practice so as to enable service suppliers to conduct their business in each other’s markets. Key 
domestic regulation disciplines would relate to the submission of applications by service suppliers who were seeking authorization to supply a service, including obligations to allow the submission 
of applications at any time, accept electronic submissions as well as authenticated copies, and 
schedule required examinations at reasonably frequent intervals. In processing applications, it was also important for authorities to provide service suppliers with clear and timely decisions. Setting S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 10 - 
 
  out specifics on how applications should be processed would contribute towards this objective and 
could be realistically addressed with obligations to: prevent the levying of unreasonable fees; establish normal timeframes for processing; proce ss applications without undue delay; ensure the 
impartiality of authorities; inform applicants of decisions in writing; provide reasons for rejection; 
and allow applicants to correct deficient submissions. At the same time, he cautioned other 
Members against pursuing a horizontal necessity test, as such a polarizing element would likely create a chill with respect to domestic regulation negotiations.  
2.38.  In order for the negotiations to move ahead, Members would need to engage pragmatically 
and to credibly demonstrate engagement. Members needed to move away from entrenched positions and explore questions such as how to ensu re sufficient flexibility for developing Members, 
while establishing certainty around the implemen tation of any negotiated outcome by large WTO 
Members.  
2.39.  The representative of Egypt presented his delegation's views on the four elements for 
discussion listed in the document by co-sponsor s. Egypt's service suppliers' experience with 
regulatory procedures in other markets showed that these were often cumbersome. 
GATS Article VI:6 already called for the establishment of adequate procedures to verify the competence of professionals of any other Me mber. Egypt advocated the simplification of 
qualification procedures, so that these did not constitute unnecessary barriers. As for technical 
standards, Members should address how developing countries could participate more effectively in setting international standards. The complexity and dissimilarity of regulatory regimes across various markets posed many challenges to the supply of services in different sectors. He hoped 
that disciplines on domestic regulation would provide a means of addressing some of those 
challenges. 
2.40.  Turning to negotiating interests and objectives, Egypt's priorities related to transparency, 
effective pro-competitive regulation, and flexibilities for individual developing country Members. 
Transparency bred accountability and was important for all fields of commercial activity in order to 
promote a competitive environment. His delegation was, in principle, supportive of developing 
additional transparency provisions, but would like to ensure that such provisions did not impose 
burdens beyond Egypt's institutional capacity. With regard to effective pro-competitive regulation, he noted that in sectors where full market acce ss and national treatment commitments existed, 
foreign suppliers would often still find it difficult to provide services in a host market under 
prevailing regulations. Therefore, pro-competitiv e effective regulation as opposed to restrictive 
regulation was a pre-requisite for liberalization to produce the expected efficiency gains without compromising on quality and other policy objectives. It could not be ignored that the state of 
regulatory and institutional frameworks in many developing countries was still at an emerging 
stage or at times non-existent. Many developing countries were still undertaking reforms of their 
services sectors, which involved introduction of new laws and regulations in pursuit of sound 
regulatory capacity and institutions. To achieve the above-mentioned objectives and priorities, the 
following elements should be included in the future domestic regulation disciplines: transparency; simplification of procedures for licensing qualifications; and streamlining of substantive requirements for licensing and qualifications, so that these would not constitute more restrictions 
than necessary to achieve legitimate policy objectives. Disciplines should encourage and facilitate 
the participation of developing countries in the development of international services standards. Reliable international standards, which reflect the interests and concerns of both developing and 
developed countries, might eventually be used as benchmarks for what may be considered the 
least trade restrictive means of achieving policy objectives. In short, an approach similar to TBT and SPS could be envisaged in the long run. Of course, such a level of rule-making could not be 
attained until reliable internationally recognized standards existed. He underscored the need to 
consider flexibility for individual developing Member countries in applying the disciplines. 
2.41.  With regard to the way forward, he expressed the view that no Member should be forced to 
subscribe to any one approach or another. Theref ore, Members who were willing to move forward 
should avail themselves of the opportunity to do  so, similar to what had been done on several 
previous occasions. A useful vehicle for such an approach would be a reference paper with a core minimum of provisions to be adhered to by thos e Members who schedule it, with other provisions 
possibly subject to adjustment depending on individual margins of flexibility.  
2.42.  The representative of Costa Rica welcomed the issues raised in the discussion paper which it 
considered relevant to the work of the WPDR. A discussion around these issues would enable S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 11 - 
 
  Members to establish the basis for substantial results that met the mandate of Article V:4 of the 
GATS. Disciplines in domestic regulation had the potential to ensure greater predictability for service providers and could impact positively on small and medium sized enterprises. Good regulatory practice was essential to promote the development of trade in services and ensure 
access to markets. He recalled several topics mentioned by other delegations, such as 
transparency, opportunity for review of applic ations, procedures related to licensing, etc. 
Costa Rica looked at all these elements with an open mind, but stressed the importance of 
ensuring that disciplines should meet the need s of today's economy. His delegation had no 
particular preference for a specific process in moving the work forward, but called for pragmatism by all Members.  
2.43.  The representative of Argentina welcomed the proposal submitted by the co-sponsors, 
which he considered opportune and valuable. Domestic regulation was a priority for Argentina. 
Based on what other Members had already said, development of disciplines was important to generate real and less burdensome access to markets. He called for further progress to be made in 
the near future, including through open-ended informal meetings. 
2.44.  The representative of Brazil thanked th e co-sponsors for their document. He noted that 
Members had been sharing and analysing experience s with regard to domestic regulation for the 
last twenty-one years. While information on regu latory barriers was important, he expressed the 
view that Members had already sufficient information in this regard. As concerned negotiating interests and elements for inclusion in the disciplines, he noted that the point of departure of any aspiration was the mandate in GATS Article VI:4. The issue of transparency was not specifically 
mentioned in Article VI:4. While transparency was important, he agreed with Egypt that for 
developing countries, rules including transparency had to be commensurate with their abilities to implement those rules. S&D was an important part of the discussion. He expressed interest in the 
suggestion by Egypt that the development perspective could be addressed through a focus on a 
core set of rules, with additional rules for which implementation periods could be adjusted to the needs of developing and least developed country Members. As for the way forward, if Members 
wanted to work within the horizon of MC11, wo rk needed to be organized accordingly. His 
delegation was flexible with regard to the appr oach for further work. Several ways to reach the 
end point could be envisaged. If Members wanted to deal with issues on an item-by-item basis, he hoped that the Working Party would not lose time by  trying to identify the appropriate sequence of 
issues. It was important to have text-based discussions. Up until now, the only texts on the table 
were the 2009 and 2011 Chair texts. Consultations with his capital could be carried out if and when new texts were submitted, or on the basis of  the texts on the table, in which case the 2009 
text was preferred by Brazil. It was difficult to mobilize capitals just on ideas. At some point a text 
was needed in order to make the discussion work. He was open to informal and intersessional meetings between now and the next cluster, if that were deemed useful.  
2.45.  The representative of the United States su pported the views expressed by others in terms of 
the challenges faced by service suppliers and ac knowledged the need to address those challenges. 
Members were still considering how best to achieve those objectives and discussions had been deadlocked for a long time in the WPDR. Thanking the proponents for their initiative, he said he 
considered the contributions of Members to be very interesting and to contain a lot of detail which 
would be useful to have in writing. In earlier interventions, the United States had set out some objectives that could lead Members to get past the barriers that had been preventing outcomes in 
this group for a long time. He acknowledged th at, at the present meeting, many Members had 
expressed ambition equal to or greater than what ha d failed earlier. With regard to old texts, his 
delegation remained opposed to both Chair texts and urged some pragmatism and new thinking in 
this regard. He reiterated that work needed to begin with something simple, which built confidence 
and could begin to register progress. Members had different regulatory practices, different terminologies, objectives, resources and priorities, and this variety among Members was extremely difficult to work out and synthesize. Attempts to craft one-size-fits-all approaches to very 
complicated regulatory issues, or a blanket necessity test, would not work.  
2.46.  He noted that New Zealand, Korea, the Ru ssian Federation, and some other delegations had 
offered ideas for a simplified way forward on which more clarity was needed. Other interventions 
listed numerous elements that were certainly of interest to his delegation. A smaller subset of 
these elements might fit into a simple approach that might actually lead towards success. The U n i t e d  S t a t e s  c o n t i n u e d  t o  f i r m l y  b e l i e v e  t h a t  it was necessary to have assurances from large 
emerging economies that they would apply negotiated disciplines without recourse to S&D. Good S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 12 - 
 
  governance and simplification of complicated re gulatory regimes was something that all should 
participate in. He invited delegations to turn their detailed interventions into submissions, which would be extremely helpful in terms of further analyzing them. It was not clear whether any suggestions made at the present meeting were concrete enough for his delegation to support at 
this time, but he would encourage the proponents to further clarify their ideas and share them 
with the membership in writing so that any future meeting could allow for a full engagement. 
2.47.  The representative of Switzerland stated that his delegation had co-sponsored the 
discussion paper which he considered an appropriate way to continue efforts towards the effective 
implementation of the full mandate of the Working Party. Disciplines on domestic regulation were important to improve the benefits accruing from market access commitments undertaken under the GATS and to ensure that all service suppliers, re gardless of size or sector of activity, effectively 
enjoyed the market access granted by other Members. Switzerland wished that the WPDR 
continued and concluded its work on measures rela ting to licensing requirements and procedures, 
qualification requirements and procedures, and technical standards. Such work should continue to 
take account of the special situation of developing country Members and their specific export 
interests in service trade. Like others, his delega tion wished to resume text-based discussions as 
soon as possible. Switzerland preferred the most recent version of the Chair's text as a basis to 
restart discussions, but like others was prepared to show flexibility on this matter. It was 
important to move forward quickly, and in this regard the openness by many Members who were not amongst the co-sponsors was encouraging. It was important to move one concrete step ahead so as not to repeat the same discussion at the ne xt meeting. Members should take the opportunity 
to take a little step forward and acknowledge th at the mindset had changed and that there was a 
will to move forward.  
2.48.  The representative of India recalled her dele gation's detailed intervention at the last WPDR 
meeting which had set out India's position on the domestic regulation negotiations. India 
continued to be actively interested and enga ged in furthering the mandated Article VI:4 
negotiations in a holistic manner. Both the domestic regulation and market access negotiations 
constituted an integral part of any services negotiation. Her delegation regarded the submission by 
co-sponsors as timely and relevant. Turning to the four discussion items proposed, she agreed that it was important to share experiences of domestic  regulatory barriers impacting Members’ service 
suppliers or impacting their commercial interests. Only when Members were fully aware of the 
problems their suppliers were facing could they de sign appropriate solutions. An endeavour in this 
direction had been made by India when it tabled the Mode 4 paper in the Council for Trade in Services in March 2016, which had raised pertinent issues. She further recalled that in the run up 
to the Nairobi Minsiterial, India had tabled a submission on transparency of measures relating to 
movement of natural persons. This proposal had be en prompted by India's experience that indirect 
or implicit barriers were most prominent and most inhibitive for delivery of services through 
Mode 4. The lack of transparency in the implemen tation of existing Mode 4 commitments impaired 
effective access under this mode of supply. Other areas in which Indian service suppliers had faced 
bottlenecks in accessing markets abroad related to regulations on qualification requirements and procedures. More often than not, the regulati ons governing qualification requirements and 
procedures were vague, not clearly inscribed and, in themselves, a restriction to the supply of a 
service. They were not based on objective and tr ansparent criteria and were not related to the 
objectives of the measure at issue and to the service being regulated. Another serious bottleneck 
faced by Indian suppliers was related to non-recognit ion of qualifications and lack of procedures to 
verify compliance with qualification requirements. Further, even in Mode 1, Indian service suppliers faced regulatory barriers on cross bord er data transfer which impeded commercial or 
business processing transactions. 
2.49.  Based on the above, the objective of developi ng domestic regulation disciplines should be to 
facilitate trade in services by ensuring that measures relating to regulatory requirements and procedures addressed the numerous border and behind-the-border barriers as well as procedural 
bottlenecks, were based on objective and transparent criteria and did not constitute disguised 
restrictions on trade in services. However, disciplines should not compromise the right of Members to regulate in order to achieve public polic y objectives. As discussions moved ahead, the 
development dimension needed to be fully taken on board. Elements that should be included in the 
future domestic regulation disciplines should a ddress the problems faced by service suppliers and 
the objectives and priorities arising from these pr oblems. This could best be decided collectively by 
the Members after taking into account all views and concerns expressed. Negotiations on these 
elements could be based on already existing Chai r texts and additional proposals and should take S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 13 - 
 
  place in a bottom-up fashion. She urged Members to come up with proposals so that the process 
could be taken forward. Her delegation was also working on some ideas which she hoped to share with the membership and which would focus on measures to facilitate trade in services. 
2.50.  The representative of Barbados, speaking on behalf of the African, Caribbean and Pacific 
(ACP) Group of States, stated that the ACP Group wa s still reflecting on its strategy for trade in 
services and would come back with a more substantive contribution in due course. Sharing some general observations, she noted that some Members had reflected on the “growing and diverse 
interest amongst the Membership in pursuing further work on Domestic Regulation disciplines 
under the scope of the full mandate of GATS Article VI.4”. She considered that this statement should, at least for the Members of the ACP Group,  be contextualised within the proper framework 
under which such sentiments had been voiced. She recalled that in the final few weeks before 
Nairobi, a few delegations had supported a proposal for a transparency-only outcome as a 
deliverable for the tenth Ministerial Conference. At  that time, the majority of Members had voiced 
their concern about the limited time to discuss such a proposal, and more importantly for the ACP 
Group, that the issues which developing countries had listed to be of importance to them had not 
been included in the mini basket for delivery in Na irobi. It was within this context, therefore, that 
the ACP Group had indicated its preference for a comprehensive discussion not based solely on 
transparency. The ACP Group had not had a full disc ussion of the submission by the group of co-
sponsors as of yet. She indicated a few points which were key to any discussion, if there were to be an agreement to commence negotiations on domestic regulation. She reiterated that the principle of special and differential treatment re mained sacrosanct to the work of the WTO, 
especially in its negotiating pillar. This had agai n been reinforced by Ministers and was set out in 
paragraph 32 of the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration. In domestic regulation therefore, ACP Group members had placed particular importance on a robust development section including the principle 
of self-designation of transition periods, impl ementation based on acquisition of capacity for 
developing countries, and differential obligations between developed and developing countries. Also central to the delivery on the development component were the elimination or reduction of 
restrictions in licensing and qualification requir ements and procedures in favour of developing 
countries and LDCs. 
2.51.  There had to be a clear understanding that any disciplines in domestic regulation should not 
impinge on developing country rights to implemen t, adjust or further regulate their services 
sectors without penalty or threat. The ACP Group al so supported the long-stabilized text that LDCs 
should not be required to take commitments on new domestic regulation disciplines. The ACP Group was comprised of small delegations with many capacity constraints. Any process of 
meetings in the intervening period between clus ters needed to be fluid and should not limit 
Members’ ability to participate in the Working Party’s work, either at the national level in capitals, or in our Groups. Adequate time would need to be  allowed for the Group's capitals to be engaged 
and to consider contributions to any exchange of experiences faced, or any other submissions that 
the Group might wish to prepare, and to take into account the submissions of others. The ACP Group would therefore need to examine any schedul e proposed by the Chair before agreeing on 
process. In concluding, the ACP Group signalled its continued engagement in the work of the 
Working Party on Domestic Regulation.
 
2.52.  The representative of the Plurinational St ate of Bolivia shared many of the points put 
forward by Barbados on behalf of the ACP Group, pa rticularly with regard to special and differential 
treatment and the need for transparency in the negotiations. The WTO brought together a very 
wide range of approaches to regulatory issues. Bolivia was not a demandeur for domestic regulation disciplines. His delegation considered that disciplines on Members' regulatory systems 
were intrusive and sought to standardize how each  country regulated. No standard developed at 
the WTO should run counter to Members' own power to regulate, and Bolivia had made a proposal to that effect back in 2011. His delegation need ed more time to consider the submission by co-
sponsors with capital and would revert with more comments at a later date. He did not object to 
having a debate along the lines suggested by proponents, but remained cautious on text-based 
negotiations and preferred to look at this issue at the next meeting of the Working Party. The WTO 
needed to take a balanced approach to all issues and outcomes. If there were going to be work on 
services, he hoped that other issues of interest to Bolivia such as agriculture would be handled 
with the same level of enthusiasm. 
2.53.  The representative of Nigeria recalled that according to a Secretariat report, there had been 
three Chairman texts to date: first, a 2007 draft text perceived to have been accepted by all S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 14 - 
 
  Members as basis for negotiation, followed by in tensive paragraph–by-paragraph consultations in 
July and September 2007; second, the 2008 draft text which had closed a few gaps with suggestions on possible compromises on more mature issues, although it had not altered paragraphs where divergences persisted, nor the ov erall level of ambition of the text; and third, 
the 2009 draft text, which contained modest changes, mainly prompted by the Chair’s departure 
and his intention to leave a text to his successor that reflected discussions that had taken place in 2008. On the other hand, the 2011 Chairman’s Progress Report followed a paragraph-by-
paragraph sweeping exercise and drafting sessions, in response to the General Council's call for 
renewed engagement across all areas of the DDA. The report categorized some paragraphs as adopted ad referendum , or set out one or more language alternatives. Unfortunately, the 2011 
Chair’s text had not enjoyed the consensus of Members. Against this background, one pertinent 
question was how the domestic regulation mandate would be carried out as part of the services 
element of the DDA. He further wondered whether a stocktaking was needed to identify elements that were sufficiently stabilized and ad vanced to facilitate further work.  
2.54.  It was important that objectives and approaches contained in Annex C of the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Declaration should remain the substantive guiding principles for an outcome on domestic regulation, and there should be no deviation from this fundamental principle. Both 
domestic regulation and market access constituted an integral part of the services negotiations. A 
balanced domestic regulation package had to address the development dimension of the Doha Round. The principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries should be respected and reflected in any outcome. The principl e of self-designation of transition periods and 
implementation upon acquisition of capacity for developing countries should be incorporated in the 
negotiating texts. Members should be mindful of  the challenges by most developing countries, 
whose regulators did not have the resources and ca pacity to undertake streamlined, efficient and 
complex procedures. Therefore, transparency re quirements should not be burdensome. Equally 
linked to the development component was the need for the elimination or reduction of restrictions in licensing and qualification requirements and procedures in favour of developing countries and 
LDCs. Any disciplines on domestic regulation should not affect the right to regulate given the level 
of development and or impinge on the need to st rengthen regulatory frameworks. LDCs should not 
be required to take commitments on new domest ic regulations disciplines. He underscored the 
need to take into account the difficulties that arose in implementing strong disciplines on domestic 
regulation, due to the level of development, the size of the economy and, more importantly, the 
weak regulatory and institutional capacity. It was necessary to move to text-based discussions as soon as the elements that would constitute the work program were agreed, including possible 
deliverables at MC11.  
2.55.  Turning to the submission by the co-sponsors, he agreed with the sentiment that there 
seemed to be a growing and diverse interest amongst the membership in pursuing further work on 
domestic regulation under the scope of the full mandate of GATS Article VI:4. Robust domestic 
regulation disciplines were indispensable in ensuring that existing market access was not undermined. There was also no doubt that good regulatory frameworks were in the interest of the host country and could facilitate local business, attract investment, and enhance economic growth. 
Nevertheless, there remained legitimate concerns and apprehension on the part of developing 
countries, including Nigeria, related to the adoption of universally applicable regulatory frameworks or principles, or international standards, based mainly on the experience and practice 
of some developed countries that already had such frameworks in place. Due account needed to 
be given to legal infrastructure, bureaucratic culture, market realities and political values in developing countries and LDCs. Another concern was the possibility of likely external interventions, 
especially with regard to proposals for prior comment on proposed regulation, where Members had 
to justify the rationale for such regulations befo re they could be adopted. Furthermore, most 
developing countries were faced with institutional weaknesses, coupled with low regulatory capabilities, which also raised implementation concerns of the future disciplines on domestic 
regulation. Therefore, going forward, disciplines on  domestic regulation should be broad enough to 
accommodate a wide variety of national circumstances, while striking a balance so as not to render the disciplines ineffective. Therefore it would be reassuring to follow the TFA model premised on 
the principle of special and differential treatment.  
2.56.  The representative of Ecuador stated that his delegation had significant reservations 
regarding the draft disciplines on domestic regulation because some of its provisions compromised 
the necessary policy space Members required to fulfil their development goals. The issue of 
domestic regulation was linked to Members' public policies and their right to regulate with a view S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 15 - 
 
  to addressing market failures in services trade. In order to preserve the right to regulate, broad 
S&D treatment should be envisaged so as to enable developing country as well as LDC Members to preserve this right without subjecting it to any kind of limitation or time frame.  
2.57.  The representative of South Africa associ ated her delegation with the statement delivered 
by Barbados on behalf of the ACP Group. Than king the proponents for their submission, she 
welcomed the elements for discussion which had in troduced some very pertinent questions that 
would inform future discussions in the Working Party. She would provide more substantive 
feedback at the next meeting, but recalled South Africa's long held positions and interests in these 
disciplines, and that the five substantive elements of domestic regulation should be part of the 
negotiated disciplines. The level and depth of the positions would evolve through negotiations, if 
and when they resumed. Any horizontal discipli nes for domestic regulation needed to provide 
recognition for the difficulties faced by developing country Members in accordance with the 
principles of S&D treatment. 
2.58.  The representative of Saint Lucia, speaking on behalf of OECS WTO member states 
supported the statement made by Barbados on beha lf of the ACP Group. Services trade accounted 
for a significant portion of the GDP of the OECS member states and domestic regulation was an 
issue that continued to hamper effective market access for OECS service suppliers. OECS member 
s t a t e s  w o u l d  b e  a  p o s i t i o n  t o  c o n t r i b u t e  m o r e  m e a n i n g f u l l y  i n  f u t u r e  W P D R  m e e t i n g s  o n  t h e  
questions posed. 
2.59.  The representative of Australia appreciate d the amount of support and active engagement 
from delegations in the Working Party's discussion  at the present meeting which had reinforced 
shared objectives for working towards an outcome on domestic regulation. Australian stakeholders 
considered addressing regulatory barriers to be a priority in international trade in services negotiations. There was no point in having market access if the procedures and requirements for 
licensing and qualifications were so onerous that service suppliers could not access a market. Good 
domestic regulatory practice was essential for a productive business environment and supportive of all trade and investment. She noted a clear interest in delivering on the full scope of the 
mandate under GATS Article VI:4. Australia would like to see a number of specific elements to be 
included in domestic regulation disciplines. With regard to development and administration of measures, domestic regulatory measures of general application in all sectors should be developed and administered in a reasonable, objective and impartial manner. She believed that there was 
broad agreement from Members that domestic regu lation disciplines should encompass the three 
objectives under GATS Article IV:4 (a)-(c). This  could include provisions on development and 
administration of measures to ensure the impartiality of decision making processes and the 
adequacy of procedures for verifying and assessing qualifications, disciplines to avoid requiring a 
services supplier to approach more than one comp etent authority for authorization, and disciplines 
that addressed timeframes for submitting applicatio ns. Further, disciplines were needed relating to 
the format of applications, including on submission in electronic format and acceptance of 
authenticated copies of documents. With regard to  processing of applications, disciplines should 
address timeframes, provisions to deal with incomplete applications, rejection and resubmission, allow service suppliers to request information on the status of an application, and ensure 
applicants were informed of the decision. Disciplines were needed to ensure that once a licence or 
qualification was granted, a service supplier would be able to provide services without undue delay. Disciplines should ensure that any fees  were reasonable, transparent and did not, in 
themselves, restrict the supply of a service. Also, there should be disciplines to ensure that where 
examinations were required to obtain a licence or qualification, that they were held relatively frequently. Disciplines should further ensure that  any services standards were developed through 
open and transparent processes, taking into account international and domestic standards.  
2.60.  She considered that there was a lot of convergence already around provisions on 
transparency, as part of a comprehensive outcome on domestic regulation, including provisions on the publication and availability of information on laws, regulations, and administrative rulings of 
general application, including guidance on the type of information that should be published, 
disciplines relating to publication of measures in advance of adoption, provision for interested persons to comment on measures and to allow a reasonable time between publication and the 
coming into effect of those measures. Australia was certainly open to considering development-
related provisions that recognized difficulties related to institutional capacity, particularly in the form of phase-in periods and flexibility concer ning compliance by LDCs. She acknowledged the 
useful suggestions for capacity development rela ted provisions to assist developing country S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 16 - 
 
  Members and especially LDC Members to establish and develop their regulatory frameworks, 
recognising the contribution that good regulatory  practice could make to positive development, 
trade and economic growth outcomes. Her delegation  could also support the inclusion of language 
reaffirming the right to regulate. 
2.61.  Moving to negotiations on these elements, she had taken note of calls from Members 
including Brazil and the United States for proponen ts of specific elements to bring forward text 
proposals. She recognized that there was an impo rtant body of existing work in both the 2009 and 
2011 Chair texts. In addition, many Members had negotiated strong domestic regulation 
disciplines in their FTAs, and there might be ot her agreements that proponents could draw on, 
particularly in relation to development and capaci ty building. She noted also the desire by many 
delegations to avoid long-standing debates about which text could be a basis for further work. It 
would be up to proponents to decide which texts to use in bringing forward proposals on specific 
elements. Australia would be working with interested Members on a proposal for the next WPDR meeting as the basis to start text negotiations.  
2.62.  The Chairperson noted the positive spirit and level of engagement visible in many of the 
interventions. With regard to the way forward,  she recalled that there was interest by many 
delegations to move the substantive discussions forward, and for text-based work to resume. 
While many delegations had indicated a great degree of flexibility with regard to the next steps, a 
few different approaches had been suggested, su ch as holding more in-depth discussions of 
specific elements in an open-ended format before moving to text proposals, which could then be worked on in a second stage. Other delegations had felt that the elements discussed today could 
be transformed into more concrete text proposal s, without a need for further thematic discussion 
beforehand, keeping in mind that this would make it easier for capitals to provide concrete feedback.  
2.63.  The representatives of the European Unio n and New Zealand reiterated their support to 
move to substantive discussions. They had su ggested open-ended meetings to address the 
different elements mentioned, and were also happy to consider any text proposals in such 
consultations. Whatever format and method for work was chosen, work should resume quickly and 
before the next cluster. 
2.64.  The representative of Brazil cautioned ag ainst consultations without submission of more 
concrete elements, and could not see how such consultations could move the work forward. Open-
ended consultations were most useful if underpinned by new ideas and proposals.  
2.65.  The representative of Australia agreed that open-ended consultations would be made 
substantively worthwhile if proponents came forward with more concrete proposals. 
2.66.  The representative of Norway requested the Chair to provide an informal summary of the all 
the specific elements that Members had raised for inclusion in domestic regulation disciplines. 
Such a list of elements would provide Members with  a useful overview of the substantive elements 
suggested at the present meeting. 
2.67.  The Chairperson agreed to prepare an informal summary along the lines proposed, on her 
own responsibility, if agreeable to Members. This summary could be circulated in addition to the 
Secretariat's report of the meeting. She encourag ed Members to consider sharing their substantive 
statements with each other in order to facilitate further consultations. Given the range of ideas 
presented with regard to next steps, she would consult in different formats with delegations in the coming weeks in order to create a basis for further and more concrete discussion. She also 
encouraged Members to put forward written proposal s. She requested Members to take note of the 
statements made, and suggested that the Working Party revert to this agenda item at its next meeting. 
2.68.  It was so agreed. S/WPDR/M/67 
 
- 17 - 
 
  3  ITEM C – OTHER BUSINESS 
3.1.  No matters were raised under 'Other Business'. 
__________