G/STR/W/44  
 
3 May 2016  
(16-2480)  Page: 1/3  
Working Party on State Trading Enterprises  Original: English  
 
 SUBMISSION BY CANADA TO THE WORKING PARTY ON STATE TRADING ENTERPRISES 
AGRICULTURAL EXPORTING STATE TRADING ENTERPRISES 
The following communication, dated 2 May 2016, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of Canada. 
 
_______________ 
 
 1  INTRODUCTION 
1.1.  At the 9
th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC9) Ministers adopted the Declaration on Export 
Competition (WT/MIN(13)/40). Among other things, this established an annual dedicated 
discussion to examine developments in the field of  export competition during the June meeting of 
the Committee on Agriculture (CoA). These discussion s are structured around a report prepared by 
the Secretariat which is updated annually based on  Members notifications to the CoA, the Working 
Party on State Trading Enterprises (STEs) and resp onses to a questionnaire. The second revision 
of this report, Export Subsidies, export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes, 
international food aid and STEs (G/AG/W/125/Rev.2), was circulated to Members on 19 May 2015. 
1.2.  Addendum 4 of the report (G/AG/W/125/Rev.2/Add.4) specifically addresses agriculture 
exporting state trading enterprises and therefore is  directly relevant to the work of the Working 
Party on STEs. Canada would encourage other Members to incorporate a review of this paper, and 
a forthcoming update, in preparation for the next meeting of the Working Party on STEs. 
2  SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 2.1.  In preparation for the second annual dedica ted discussion on export competition, which took 
place during the June 2015 CoA, the Cairns Group prepared a short paper summarizing the key 
findings of the Secretariat report, Annual Export Competition Review – Submission from the Cairns 
Group to the 74
th Meeting of the Committee on Agriculture (CoA) in June 2014 (G/AG/W/144). The 
section of this paper dealing with agriculture ex porting STEs is reproduced below for reference. 
2.2.  As was the case during the last review period, twenty Members notified or reported 
agricultural exporting STEs covering a wide range of products (Table 4). These Members notified or reported a total of 67 agriculture exporting STEs, which is ten fewer than during the last review 
period. Four more Members also confirmed they do not have agricultural exporting STEs, bringing 
the total to 29 Members.
1 A continued positive transparency development is that new and updated 
information was reported on agricultural exporting STEs by several Members as compared to 
current STE notifications. However, it is disappo inting that there was no overall improvement in 
the response rate. 
2.3.  China (25) and India (14) reported by far the most agriculture exporting STEs, accounting for 
58% of the total reported number by all Member s. Notably, Colombia reported only four 
agriculture exporting STEs, whereas it reported 14 last year.2 
                                               
1 Counting the EU and its Member States as one. 
2 Colombia's most recent notification to th e Working Party on Stat e Trading Enterprises 
(G/STR/N/15/COL) clarified that only 4 of their 14 STEs are active exporters. G/STR/W/44 
 
- 2 - 
 
  2.4.  The distribution by product grouping shows a similar concentration with two product 
categories (fruits and vegetables and tobacco) accounting for 52% of the reported agriculture exporting STEs. The next most numerous product category is "wheat and wheat flour, coarse 
grains and rice" with five such STEs reported. 
2.5.  Only nine of the 20 Members (Australia; Colombia; Costa Rica; Ecuador; Indonesia; Israel; 
Moldova, Republic of; New Zealand; and Ukraine)  responded to the section of the questionnaire 
requesting information on export values, prices and destinations. This is an improvement over the 
last reporting period when 6 Members responded to this portion of the questionnaire. 
Notwithstanding this improvement and the fact the responses may have been limited by commercial confidentiality considerations, these Members account for just 14 STEs (21% of those reported), making it difficult to assess the overall influence of agriculture exporting STEs on global 
markets. Where such information is provided, export volumes and values generally (but not 
always) appear small relative to overall global trade in the products in question. 
2.6.  Of the four developed countries that reported agriculture exporting STEs (one each in 
Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Ukraine), those in Australia, New Zealand and Ukraine appear 
to have export monopoly powers. Of the 63 agriculture exporting STEs reported by 16 developing countries, several appear to have export monopoly powers or other special privileges. The report 
does not however contain sufficiently detailed trade statistics to determine whether these STEs 
would meet the Rev.4 modalities general de minimis  criteria (Annex K, footnote 5). Similarly, while 
many of the developing country STEs would likely meet the Rev.4 modalities special and differential treatment criteria (Annex K, paragraphs 4-6), in most cases more information would be 
required to make a complete assessment, particularly with respect to paragraph 6. 
Table 1 Reported Agriculture Exporting STEs by Member 
Member Number of agricultural 
exporting STEs Product Coverage 
Australia 1 Rice 
Brazil 1 Any agriculture products 
Canada 1 Wheat, barley, canola 
China 25 Rice, maize, cotton, tobacco, tea, soybeans 
Colombia 4 Various alcoholic beverages 
Costa Rica 1 Cane sugar 
Dominica 1 Bananas 
Ecuador 1 Maize, rice, cereals 
Fiji 1 Raw sugar, molasses 
Grenada 1 Cocoa beans 
India 14 Onions, gum karaya, sugar,  
Indonesia 1 Rice 
Israel 3 Groundnuts, eggs, fruits, vegetables 
Moldova, Republic of 1 Wine 
Morocco 1 Loose leaf cigarettes 
New Zealand 1 Kiwifruit 
Trinidad and Tobago 1 Cocoa, coffee 
Tunisia 2 Snuff, leak tobacco, olive oil  
Ukraine 1 Undenatured ethyl alcoho l of an alcoholic strength by 
volume of 80% vol. or higher; ethyl alcohol and other spirits, denatured, of any strength 
Viet Nam 5 Salt, rice, coffee, tea, fruits, vegetables, etc. 
 
3  CONCLUSIONS 
3.1.  Some aspects of the review process under the CoA are relevant to the Working Party on 
STEs, namely the parts of the annual dedicated di scussion on export competition and associated 
Secretariat report that deal with agriculture exporting STEs. Taking this work into account would 
help to enrich the review process under the Working Party on STEs. 
3.2.  The reporting of 67 agriculture exporting STEs across 20 Members, some of which appear to 
have export monopoly powers and/or other special privileges, suggests that these entities may G/STR/W/44 
 
- 3 - 
 
  have important impacts of global markets. However,  the extent of the impacts is nearly impossible 
to assess based on current information. This is an area that may warrant further examination. 
3.3.  In their responses to the Secretariat's questionnaire, several Members provided new and 
updated information on agricultural exporting STEs as compared to current STE notifications. While 
this is a positive development from an overall tran sparency perspective, it speaks to the need for 
Members to make greater efforts to comply with notification obligations within the framework of the WP on STEs. 
__________